Can the newly elected Assembly work to secure the Belfast Agreement? That is the compelling question after a near-disaster for the Ulster Unionist Party leaves David Trimble's election as First Minister dependent on the votes of the PUP's David Ervine and Billy Hutchinson and at least two No campaigners within his own ranks.
To non-unionist parties, the two governments and the watching world there should, of course, be no question at all. Disdaining the very notion of "two communities", unionist politicians have long proclaimed their right to speak for "the people" of Northern Ireland. And the pro-agreement parties can claim the overwhelming support of the people in last month's referendum and again in Thursday's Assembly election.
Absurd then, they say, and unacceptable surely, that the successful implementation of the agreement - hailed just weeks ago as a model for conflict resolution - should be called into question by the difficulties and needs of internal unionist management.
Absurd they may argue. But they can hardly claim surprise, or cry foul. The agreement dictated a two-stage election process, the second half of which was always going to be more difficult for Mr Trimble. To work, moreover, the agreement needed to take root in both communities. And it always seemed possible that the very mechanisms and safeguards designed to guarantee the interests of the nationalist minority would prove the agreement's Achilles heel.
Shrewdly disclaiming their "wrecking" intent, the anti-agreement parties made no secret of their intention to seek to exploit those procedures to block the aspects they found objectionable.
As in the referendum, so in the Assembly contest the antis had the benefit of a simple, coherent, easily-packaged message. Mr Trimble faced a dilemma: to campaign on the positive aspects of the agreement, or to seek to cover his exposed flanks on issues like prisoner releases, decommissioning and Sinn Fein's entitlement to positions as of right in the proposed executive.
For much of the Assembly campaign Mr Trimble and his colleagues appeared to face both ways over the agreement. The damaging result is now clear: glad confident morning it was not. Mr Trimble awakened yesterday to the reality that he almost lost it, and could lose it yet.
The nightmare that began with the Irish Times/RTE exit poll on Thursday night became harsh reality on Friday afternoon, as the final first-preference count showed the SDLP led by John Hume in front and the UUP with its lowest share of the vote in living memory.
As they recovered from the first shock waves, UUP strategists maintained steady confidence that the final picture would look very different. The transfers would come their way. And through most of Saturday news reports proclaimed a similar message, giving Mr Trimble "the lion's share" and reporting the antis falling short of the numbers necessary to stop the Ulster Unionist leader in his tracks.
But for those obliged to stay the course, the nail-biting continued right to the last. For a few tantalising hours it seemed Dr Paisley would see his prediction of a 31-seat majority for the antis come good. In the end the anti-agreement forces fell short - but only just. The final tally of 28 seats for the UUP denies Mr Trimble all certainty, and lays before him a road scarred with hidden dangers.
As after the referendum, so now the rival unionist leaders and their spin doctors are locked in furious debate about what the final figures tell us of the disposition of the unionist community. On a straight read Glengall Street will claim victory, with a combined UUP/PUP/UDP total of 201,510 votes as against some 199,644 for the DUP, UKUP and `independent' Ulster Unionists.
However, the antis are quick to observe that Mr Trimble's final take includes more than 10,000 votes cast for three declared opponents of the agreement within his own ranks - Peter Weir and Roy Beggs jnr, who both won seats, and John Hunter, who was unsuccessful. Thus they claim an actual majority of the unionist votes cast. Moreover, whatever role they now choose to play in the Assembly, the election of Mr Beggs and Mr Weir means that, of the unionist total, a majority of the new Assembly members are known to have voted No in the referendum.
That simple fact confirms the fragility of Mr Trimble's majority. Just two defections from the UUP will be enough at any time for Dr Paisley and his allies to invoke the Assembly's consensus rules for decision-making on designated "key" issues.
Far too much significance has been placed on the "magical 30" number. It is not the means to bring the House crashing down, but it is a potent weapon in the hands of those bent on trouble. And it is almost within the grasp of Dr Paisley and Mr McCartney.
Mr Trimble and his aides will be impatient with, and dismissive of, such speculation. Whatever people did in the referendum, they say, all their candidates stood on a common manifesto. The question of possible defections, therefore, simply does not arise. But they would have said much the same thing before Mr Jeffrey Donaldson and the "young turks" jumped ship on Good Friday.
With a large dollop of patronage coming their way, party managers would doubtless have expected to find some of their truculent colleagues "more biddable" once safely on the Assembly payroll.
And even as they digested the final outcome on Saturday night they will have calculated that they could suffer some defections without losing the requisite 40 per cent of the designated unionist total in the Assembly. But Mr Trimble and his colleagues are emphatically not in the position they anticipated. And the position within their party is changing fast.
Still confident of the eventual outcome, the party bosses would have dismissed Mr Donaldson's astonishing television attack on Ken Maginnis on Friday as a regrettable burst of post-election tension. It may prove much more significant than that.
Until Friday Mr Donaldson maintained the mask of civility in his public disagreement with the leadership. By yesterday he had joined fellow No MP, William Thompson, in threatening to quit the party should Mr Trimble proceed into an Executive with Sinn Fein without "prior and ongoing decommissioning" of weapons by the IRA.
And it would appear to be no idle threat. Sources in the anti-agreement camp say this is the issue which is going to break Mr Trimble or the Ulster Unionist Party. As we report today, leading anti-agreement MPs are discussing a realignment within unionism which could lead to the creation of a new party centred on the leadership of Mr Donaldson and the DUP deputy leader, Peter Robinson.
The emerging strategem is to have Mr Trimble pledge not to enter an executive with Sinn Fein without prior IRA decommissioning, or, failing that, to seek a realignment which might win sufficient defections to force a renegotiation of the agreement.
As evidenced by Mr Donaldson's changed demeanour, the stakes could not be higher. Whatever the eventual scale and shape of realignment, it seems clear now that the Ulster Unionist Party will not be able to hold those intent on renegotiating the agreement and those committed to its implementation.
Even before polling day, the UUP leader appeared unclear and undecided about the exact nature of his commitments under the terms of the Belfast Agreement. In his weakened state, Mr Trimble will undoubtedly continue to hang tough. And while it is too neat to say Gerry Adams holds the future of the UUP leader in his hands, the unionist civil war poses a direct and powerful challenge to the Sinn Fein president.
Mr Trimble astonished the world by concluding a deal offering Sinn Fein a bridge not just into democratic politics but directly into the government of Northern Ireland. Even in his reduced circumstances, Mr Trimble may claim that with all their misgivings unionists are prepared to live with that if they are convinced that the war is over, and that the dismantling of the paramilitary apparatus is indeed an indispensable part of the process.
The pressure is now on the Sinn Fein president, and on the leadership of the IRA, to convince them.