SF and unionists at risk from the dissident one-third

There are remarkable parallels between the current state of the peace process and the situation in the multiparty talks at the end of last year. At that time, parties were locked into hardline positions, there was a growing sense of stagnation, loyalist assassins were back prowling the streets and there were ominous rumblings from the republican movement. If one were to take the temperature of the process at the moment it would be low. The mood generally is quite bleak. The Assembly has been set up in shadow form, but there is an air of unreality about its deliberations. The members as well as the general public must wonder what is the point of going through the motions on such matters as the level of public spending if it is all going to founder on the issue of decommissioning?

The Brussels outing for the Assembly members - the first time an entire parliament went to the European capital - underlined the message that the sky is the limit if the arms impasse can be broken and the show gets on the road at last. Insiders said they had never seen such an impressive and high-powered programme prepared for a visiting group. The American involvement has received the bulk of the publicity up to now, but the European commitment is also very substantial, if expressed with somewhat more restraint.

In all the circumstances, the mood among the touring Assembly members was relaxed. Sinn Fein's political opponents may have taken considerable pleasure in the party's contretemps with the Secretary General to the European Commission and long-time friend of the peace process, Mr Carlo Trojan, on the use of the Irish language, but generally speaking there was a noticeable lack of political hostility between former deadly opponents. Perhaps they felt obliged to be on their best behaviour in the New Rome, but a more optimistic reading would be that members on all sides had got the message underlying the referendum vote to "get on with it".

The needle has not gone out of the Northern situation, the guns remain in the background and death still stalks the streets. But it was a hopeful sign that mainstream unionists were at least able to see the funny side of Sinn Fein members trooping into the sumptuous residence of the British ambassador in the heart of Brussels for dinner. In a pre-ceasefire situation, contact between Sinn Fein and the British government made unionists feel threatened and disgusted in approximately equal parts, but now it is almost taken for granted. Many people were struck also by the broadly constructive tone of the contributions by the Rev Ian Paisley MEP.

But junkets and make-believe sessions of the Assembly apart, the decommissioning virus still has the process firmly in its grip. Both the unionists and the republicans remain adamant in their "can't move, won't move" stance on the issue. Someone will have to blink or the process will end in disaster.

The waters were muddied further by reports at the weekend that the IRA was planning a convention to decide on a gesture of token decommissioning as a means of getting Sinn Fein into cabinet. Usually reliable sources, both inside and outside the republican movement, dismissed the reports. No doubt the IRA does meet from time to time, with the peace process top of the agenda, but seasoned observers find it highly implausible that decommissioning, in the sense of weapons or explosives being destroyed under independent supervision, is a likely option in the immediate future.

There may, however, be room to manoeuvre on the meaning of the word "decommissioning". Mr Gerry Adams likes to say that the armaments are "out of commission". The clever men and women from the ministries in London and Dublin could no doubt work out a definition of decommissioning which both sides could in theory sign on to without loss of face.

But that could only happen if there was sufficient trust and political will on the unionist and republican sides. The unionists have persuaded many people, including - most of the time - the two governments, that they have less room to manoeuvre than Sinn Fein. The truth probably is that both leaderships have about the same space for compromise.

It is estimated that the opposition in both the UUP and republican camps to the Agreement is about one-third. Both leaderships have taken tremendous risks in going as far as they have. UUP dissidents have threatened that the moment their party leaders sit around the cabinet table with Sinn Fein a special meeting of the Ulster Unionist Council will be convened. But there is a serious question mark over the ability of the dissidents to secure a higher percentage of votes against the leadership than they did in the Europa Hotel ballot on the agreement itself.

The supporters of the Sinn Fein leadership like to say they are taking a greater risk than their UUP counterparts in this process and are in fact putting their lives on the line. It is certainly the case that their opponents would be quicker to reach for a pistol than a petition. A big bomb or an attack on the security forces by dissident republicans would have a destabilising effect, but the biggest threat of all would be a series of loyalist killings which forced the IRA to resume its role as the perceived defender of the Catholic community.

The killing of Mr Brian Service, which got surprisingly inadequate coverage in some sections of the media, was not an accidental event but potentially the first in a deadly series which could bring Northern Ireland to the brink of destruction. Last time the abyss yawned, the two governments were able to retrieve the situation. But since the election of the Assembly, London and Dublin are meant to take a back seat. The continuing stand-off between the nominal new rulers of Northern Ireland, however, means that this position cannot be sustained much longer.