Key questions for Blair

Blair is facing the following questions:

The decision by the US to drop its insistence on a 17 March deadline, and allow longer for Saddam Hussein to show he is serious about disarmament, has helped Britain to win support at the UN for a second resolution authorising war. But the signs are that President Bush will not allow his timetable to slip much further.

Can he convince the Security Council's wavering countries to back a second resolution?

The requirement for nine out of 15 votes has brought intense diplomatic pressure to bear on small countries who hold the balance of power on the Security Council. The "swing six" - Pakistan, Chile, Mexico, Cameroon, Angola and Guinea, current holder of the rotating chair - have been most carefully wooed. Both the US and France have been busy courting support, but the suspicion is that America, as the world's only superpower, is better placed to make offers the minnows can't refuse.

How will he avert the threat of a Russian or French veto?

Russia has insisted that it is prepared to vote against a second resolution but Western diplomats believe that President Vladimir Putin can be persuaded to back down with a text which sets Saddam Hussein realistic targets to comply with. France is a tougher customer, although even Jacques Chirac has left himself wriggle-room.

How will he contain opposition in his own party?

Mr Blair's supporters privately admit that he faces a huge struggle to talk MPs around. Senior ministers are touring the Commons corridors and tearoom, doing their best to persuade and cajole.

What must he do to persuade the British public?

Polls show that most people would swing behind a war if it was authorised by the UN, but without a second resolution the opposition would be intense.

If there is an attack on Iraq without a second resolution, would it be legal for Britain to join it?

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan declared this week that such a move would be in breach of the UN charter. Most international lawyers say it would be illegal, and Whitehall fears they may be right. US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's proposal that British troops may take a back seat role suggests that there are still real fears in London on the legality of military action.