Kabul/London, July 11 (DPA) The British death toll in Afghanistan Friday surpassed the level of military fatalities suffered in the Iraq war, as five more soldiers died in roadside explosions, officials said.

The deaths took the toll in Afghanistan to 184, compared to the 179 soldiers killed during the entire Iraq conflict between March, 2003 and April this year.

The defence ministry said the five soldiers were on foot patrol near Sangin in Helmand province when they were hit by two separate explosions of improvised roadside bombs.

Earlier Friday, the ministry confirmed the death of one British soldier, following the loss of two servicemen Thursday - one in an explosion and another in a clash with militants.

US-led coalition forces killed several suspected militants and arrested others in east-central Afghanistan, the British and US militaries said Friday.

The rising daily death toll has rekindled the debate in Britain about its involvement in Afghanistan.

But, speaking at the Group of Eight (G8) summit in Italy, Prime Minister Gordon Brown ruled out a change of strategy.

'This is a very hard summer, it's not over but it's vital that the international community sees through its commitment to Afghanistan,' said Brown.

'Our resolution to complete the work that we have started in Afghanistan and Pakistan is undiminished. We knew from the start that defeating the insurgency in Helmand would be a hard and dangerous job but it is vital.'

Britain has increased its presence in Afghanistan by several hundred to around 8,300 for an interim period up to the elections in Afghanistan next month.

But the fierce clashes and rising death toll that have accompanied the current US-led offensive in Helmand have prompted criticism from opposition leaders and senior former soldiers.

The top US commander in the Middle East, General David Petraeus, has described the battle in southern Afghanistan as 'the longest campaign'.

Meanwhile, General Charles Guthrie, a former head of the British Armed Forces, Friday accused the government of putting British forces at risk and spending the 'minimum they could get away with' on defence.