US: It was meant to be a crowning moment for the Special Relationship - an appearance by Mr Tony Blair before both houses of Congress as reward for the his loyalty to Mr George Bush - but the occasion tomorrow is now regarded as a political embarrassment. Conor O'Clery, North America Editor, reports.
Mr Blair will indeed get a rapturous reception from Congress members grateful for his unflinching support for invading Iraq, but the relationship has come under severe strain over several post-war issues.
The two parties in Congress are themselves deeply divided over Mr Bush's credibility on weapons of mass destruction.
Sensing that the President is more weak and vulnerable than at any time since September 11th 2001, Democrats have gone on the attack over what Senator Edward Kennedy called yesterday a "failed and flawed policy".
The bitterness of Republicans at the assault on Mr Bush was expressed by House Majority Leader Mr Tom DeLay who said Democrats think "if they just get a little bit angrier, and a little bit meaner and a little bit louder the American people will start hating the president as much as they do." One of the thorniest issues for Mr Blair, who will spend a mere six hours in Washington, concerns two British prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba who are due to be tried in US military courts.
Mr Blair is under domestic pressure to demand repatriation or get fair trial procedures for Mr Feroz Abbasi (23) and Mr Moazzam Begg (35) who could be sentenced to death on evidence that might not stand up in a British court. Without a concession he will be seen to have gained little from his loyalty to Mr Bush.
Mr Blair for his part has rebuffed a request by visiting Israel Prime Minister Mr Ariel Sharon to cut ties with Mr Yasser Arafat, undermining US efforts to isolate the Palestinian president.
The same members of Congress who will cheer Mr Blair are also moving to make sure US defence contractors gain even more favours in Iraq at the expense of British and other companies, according to the Wall Street Journal. The biggest embarrassment however arises over the row about the elusive weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
The White House has retracted a statement in Mr Bush's January State of the Nation address that "the British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought substantial quantities of uranium from Africa".
It said initially it had established that the claim was partly based on forged documents, but now says it might yet be true as Britain is standing by its intelligence claims. Yet it has emerged that the CIA encouraged Britain not to include this information in their intelligence dossier last September because it was dubious. UK Foreign Secretary Mr Jack Straw said Britain had other foreign sources which it could not disclose, leading to speculation that it France may be made the fall guy for the information about Niger.
Inconsistencies have also emerged in the White House account of the issue. Mr Bush said on Monday that doubts were only raised after his January speech, but CIA director Mr George Tenet said on Friday that he warned the White House about the uranium story before the speech.
White House press secretary Mr Scott McClellan yesterday refused to say if the President was aware the CIA took a reference to Niger out of a speech he gave on October 7th on Iraq's alleged nuclear programme.
Senator Jay Rockefeller, the senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the January statement by Mr Bush was not a mistake, that it was a deliberate effort to create a false impression.
Senator Bob Graham of Florida, a presidential candidate, said Mr Bush "deceived the American people" with "a statement that he either knew was wrong or should have known was wrong." The most powerful critique came from Senator Edward Kennedy who said the "rush to war" was a mistake and that the US had not sought help from the UN or NATO in providing troops for Iraq "because people in the Republican Party don't want to admit they were wrong."