Senior Ulster Unionist politicians opposed to negotiations with Sinn Fein failed to challenge Mr David Trimble at the party's annual conference at the weekend, but there was bitter criticism from some grassroots activists.
In the debate on constitutional issues, two delegates called for their party to immediately withdraw from the Stormont talks, which they claimed was placing the Union in grave danger.
Mr Trimble is known to have been concerned that the MP for East Derry, Mr Willie Ross, who is opposed to negotiating with Sinn Fein, would attack his strategy at the conference. Mr Ross did not do so, although he warned it would be constitutional suicide for the UUP to accept any settlement which weakened the Union.
In a hardline speech, he said: "Let it be plainly understood by all concerned that this party will not accept cross-Border institutions with executive powers. We are a free people and we demand the rights of a free people."
The worst fears of unionists had been confirmed by recent disclosures of "sleaze and corruption" in the Republic, "and we don't need the influence of that group of people in Northern Ireland", he said.
The MP for South Belfast, the Rev Martin Smyth, spoke in favour of his party's decision to take part in the Stormont talks. It was vital that unionists were present to defend the Union, he said.
However, a delegate, Mr Ian Crozier, assailed the leadership. The talks process was "based on a lie and the UUP has no mandate to be part of it", he said.
He said his party had broken the promise it made in its Westminster election manifesto to oppose Sinn Fein's entry into negotiations without prior decommissioning.
"The subsequent action of the leadership has made a liar out of me, out of every candidate, and out of every person who campaigned in the election."
In a veiled reference to Mr Ken Maginnis, he claimed senior party members who negotiated in Dublin in 1992 had agreed to crossBorder institutions with executive powers. He expressed concern that the same people were involved in the UUP talks team at Stormont.
"All I can say is heaven help Ulster - 1992 was a compromise too far and those men cannot be allowed to place Ulster in jeopardy again."
Mr Crozier expressed fears that London, Dublin, and Washington would railroad the UUP "into a sell-out scenario which will lead not only to the destruction of this party but also ultimately the Union".
In a coded warning to Mr Trimble, he added: "For those men who would take us down this road, mark my words well, those who sow the seeds into the wind will reap the whirlwind."
The second attack on the leadership was made by Mr Nelson Wharton, who said that Northern Ireland was facing its greatest crisis since Sunningdale. The Stormont talks were about "unionist surrender, lock, stock and barrel".
The UUP had lost its way, he said: "Our party, the party of the Union, is participating in talks that are an insult to the Union.
"We ourselves undermined the Union when we conceded to Eire's claim to be involved in Ulster by negotiating with the Dublin Government."
While a UUP Belfast councillor, Mr Nelson McCausland, refrained from such outright criticisms, he expressed his "concern" at involvement in the Stormont talks.
He said he failed to see how unionists and nationalists, with totally different objectives, could reach agreement.
He predicted the British government would put a settlement, based on the Framework Document, to the electorate next summer.
He proposed a plan similar to that already outlined by the DUP and Mr Bob McCartney's UK Unionist Party - that unionists immediately embark on a campaign to "educate" their community and ensure a huge No vote in any referendum.
Mr McCausland did not believe unionism was in a healthy state. He compared feeling in his community to the sense of demoralisation and defeat that prevailed among republicans in 1962 after the end of the IRA Border Campaign.
But republicans had removed their "old guard", brought in new activists and academic experts and developed fresh thinking and strategies, he said. "We would do well to look at what they did and to follow at least some of their examples."
An important pro-leadership speech was given by the Belfastbased barrister, Mr John Hunter. He said criticisms at the conference showed the doubts of many unionists about the peace process.
Mr Trimble would have a very clear message for Mr Blair - nationalists weren't the only group who required confidence-building measures, he said.
Mr Hunter admitted that his party was taking "grave risks" by taking part in negotiations, but "you get nowhere unless you take risks".
Another delegate, Mr James Cooper, said that dissent voiced at the conference showed that the event was not "rigged".
However, he warned that New Labour in Britain had been successful because internal critics of the leadership had remained silent while Mr Blair was striving for power. The Conservative Eurosceptics, by comparison, had destroyed their party by their public squabbling.