Today's papers react to the fall-out from Clare Short's accusation that the prime minister is pursuing a "reckless" policy on Iraq.

Telegraph

"Labour doubts and reservations about the war are very understandable, but are they so serious that they must try to hamper Britain's successful participation in something that is now all but certain to happen? Where would Britain be if she were now to withdraw from the conflict? Where would the world be if, after all this, President Bush were suddenly to say: 'Golly, Clare Short is quite right. I couldn't possibly do something without a second UN resolution. I'll take all those troops home and leave the weapons inspectors to sort it out as they have done so well for so many years already?' What message would Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden get from such a change? Miss Short's conscience has become troubled, at this late hour, by her leader's 'recklessness'. How reckless would it be if we suddenly turned round and followed Miss Short?"

Guardian

"Serious crimes have been committed in the past in the name of the dangerous doctrine of party unity. Modern parties and governments need to try to live better with dissent. If there is one thing that the public says it wants more of, it is politicians who speak their minds. That does not make Ms Short a saint, any more than it made Tony Benn one when he undermined the Wilson and Callaghan cabinets from within for so long. But it does mean there is a price worth paying for more pluralism in party political culture. For Mr Blair, that price is Ms Short - for now."

Times

"It is a measure of the fragility of Mr Blair's position that he did not summarily dismiss Clare Short, the International Development Secretary, after her intemperate comments on Sunday evening. To advertise her conviction that the United Nations alone can legitimise the removal of Saddam is one matter. To attack her own Prime Minister for 'reckless behaviour' is quite unacceptable. It was neither fair as a matter of fact, nor compatible with any concept of collective Cabinet responsibility. Mr Blair can press ahead with action in Iraq irrespective of whether or not he has secured a second UN resolution. It is implausible, though, for him credibly to retain the disloyal Ms Short as a Cabinet colleague for much longer, regardless of what happens in the Security Council."

FT

"Ms Short's candour means she cannot remain a member of the cabinet, which operates by collective responsibility. Permission to dissent from cabinet positions has been given on rare occasions, such as during the 1975 referendum on membership of the European Union. But government cannot function efficiently if ministers are sparring publicly on important issues. And serious disagreements should lead to resignation, which allows dissidents to campaign openly for their views rather than pretending false unity. Outside the cabinet, Ms Short will inevitably become a focus for the swelling band of Labour MPs unhappy with Mr Blair's Iraq policy. Her action will encourage others to follow the ministerial aide who resigned on Sunday - perhaps even some ministers. But Mr Blair is right to push ahead with his drive to win a second UN resolution that would give any action on Iraq legal and moral endorsement."

Independent

"Clare Short is right to be deeply worried by the wisdom of going to war with Iraq before Hans Blix's team of weapons inspectors have been given a full chance to do their job. And she is right to question the very legality of such a conflict, as Kofi Annan, the United Nations secretary general, did yesterday. But she was entirely wrong to make her weekend outburst against the Prime Minister, which was self-serving, personalised and incompatible with her position as a member of Mr Blair's Cabinet. Ms Short has behaved, shall we say, recklessly. There is a time and a place for serving Cabinet ministers to express their doubts over government policy - around the Cabinet table or in private meetings with the Prime Minister, such as the one she is understood to have held on Friday. She cannot subscribe to the principle of collective Cabinet responsibility, then seek out a platform to make a highly personalised attack on Mr Blair in order to gain cheap publicity and shore up her position as a standard-bearer of the anti-war movement within her party."

Mail

"Clare Short is already feeling Downing Street's wrath over her threat to quit the Cabinet in protest over Tony Blair's handling of the Iraq crisis. Indeed, her decision to raise the standard of rebellion in public could lead to the destruction of her political career. Yet even those who disagree both with her views on the issue and the way she has drawn attention to them can but admire her for at least acting to her own conscience. How different her principled stand to the caution - putting it politely - of like-minded colleagues who prefer to keep their dissent under wraps."

Sun

"If Clare Short thinks Tony Blair is reckless and wrong on Iraq, there is a simple solution. She should shove off. A Cabinet Minister's duty is to support the Prime Minister and the Government, regardless of whether he or she agrees with a particular policy. If that duty conflicts with personal principle, it is a matter of honour to resign.

"Short's threat to quit if Blair goes to war on Iraq without UN backing is an ego-boosting voyage of vanity. She knows he won't sack her now because of the embarrassing and damaging message that would send to the world. So she continues to enjoy the power of high office without the responsibility for actions she doesn't agree with. Where's the honour in that? Go now, Clare - and if Robin Cook feels the same way, take him with you."

Mirror

"Tony Blair has been so weakened that he can't even sack a minister who openly thumbs her nose at him. Clare Short said what most of Britain thinks but she is a Cabinet member and is bound by Cabinet responsibility. That means all for one and one for all - and anyone who breaks the line gets fired. Yet Mr Blair cannot sack her because that would make his situation even worse. So, at a time when he should appear at his toughest, he looks at his weakest. That is no cause for celebration. The country needs the prime minister to be strong as it heads towards war."

Express

"Ms Short is guilty of dishonour by telling the BBC of her intention to resign without warning Mr Blair first. The knife has sunk deep into his back. The contrast between Ms Short and Mr Blair could not be greater. Mr Blair has remained steadfast in his sincere belief that Saddam is an evil that must be dealt with. He has been unwavering despite intense crime. He has put his premiership on the line. Maybe the sleepless nights Ms Short says she has had over Iraq have something to do with her disloyalty to Mr Blair; who recognised her talent and gave her a job that she loves, undoubtedly does well and at which she works hard. If she quits, she will be missed, but we would miss Tony Blair more."