THE Government will engage in intensive Anglo Irish activity in the next few days to salvage the damaged prospect of a renewed IRA ceasefire over the Christmas period.
This follows the calculated rebuff to the Taoiseach and the Tanaiste when Mr John Major published a unilateral statement of the British government's terms for a new ceasefire in the House of Commons yesterday. The two documents were not agreed with the Government.
The British papers, which were ambiguous on a time for Sinn Fein's entry to all party talks in the event of a ceasefire and adherence to the Mitchell principles, caused particular offence to Coalition leaders because they set out four joint steps to be taken by the two governments to establish the credibility of a ceasefire.
Government sources were adamant last night that these steps were the subject of ongoing negotiations on the basis that "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed".
Making no attempt to hide his anger, the Taoiseach, Mr Bruton, told journalists that as far as the Government's position was concerned that was set out in the joint communique of February 28th. "Any alteration to that must be agreed," he said.
The statement issued by the British Prime Minister was simply an explanation of his government's current position and "not an authoritative statement".
He also believed that, in general, it was better when negotiations were ongoing "to wait until you have reached agreement before publishing preliminary points of view".
It is understood that Mr Bruton put these points forcefully to Mr Major in a 30 minute telephone conversation, before publication of the documents, at lunchtime yesterday.
Asserting that they would see if they could bridge the gaps in coming days, the Tanaiste, Mr Spring, said there was "a degree of uncertainty" in Mr Major's statement on Sinn Fein's entry to the talks in the event of a ceasefire.
The reason he did not sign up to the British response, to the Hume/Adams initiative at last week's Anglo Irish Inter Governmental Conference meeting, he said, was that it was not going to bring about a restoration of the ceasefire.
"In an ideal world, the statement should not have been issued until it was clear that it would reach the desired result," Mr Spring added.
The Government, in an earlier statement, said that it had repeatedly made clear its view that the conditions so carefully set out by both governments in the February communique and the ground rules paper for Sinn Fein's admission to talks should be maintained.
"The Irish Government will not accept any exclusion of Sinn Fein once these conditions are fulfilled, and hopes that, when the talks resume in January, Sinn Fein will be in a position to participate in the talks as a result, in the meantime, of an IRA ceasefire and of Sinn Fein having complied fully with the ground rules and the Mitchell principles," the statement said.
Now facing a new rift in Anglo Irish relations at a critical time in the peace process, Government sources clarified that the substantive gap between the two governments centred on their differing, interpretations of how Sinn Fein could "establish" its commitment to democratic and peaceful methods after a ceasefire.
In yesterday's papers, Mr Major stated that the British and Irish governments agreed that, beyond the unequivocal restoration of the IRA ceasefire, the Northern negotiations were without preconditions.
"But in the light of the breaking of the ceasefire and the events since then, assurances are obviously needed that any new ceasefire would be intended to be genuinely unequivocal, i.e. lasting and not simply a tactical device," he added.
The successful conclusion of this process would depend, for example, on how far the declaration of a new ceasefire was convincing, unequivocal, and intended to be lasting. Whether or not any paramilitary activity, including surveillance, targeting and weapons preparation continued would also be directly relevant, Mr Major said.
