On July 1st the Confederate flag will be lowered from the dome of the state capitol of South Carolina. One hundred and thirty five years after General Lee sued for surrender terms on behalf of the Southern army, the state congress has voted to remove the stars-and-bars battle flag of the Confederacy.
It was, according to Ed Vulliamy who reported on the story in the Observer last Sunday, a close-run thing. The vote in the lower house was 66 to 43 in favour of the motion to remove the flag. Victory came in the form of a compromise. A smaller version of the flag will continue to fly in front of the state capitol building, beside a war memorial dedicated to the memory of Confederate soldiers who died in the Civil War.
For over a century the flag has been seen by black people as a symbol of slavery and oppression. The successful campaign for its removal owes as much to economics as the desire for reconciliation between the races. The National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People has mounted a successful boycott of tourism in South Carolina and many white citizens voted for its removal on this account.
The leader of the pro-flag faction commented, "I love to see the flag atop the statehouse, but moving it is the best thing for South Carolina." Even so, there are fears that July 1st will be a day of high emotion, possibly leading to violence. South Carolina was the first of the southern states to secede from the Union and many whites still mourn for what was lost.
The argument mirrors all too clearly the debate which took place in the reconvened Stormont Assembly earlier this week and - to a lesser extent - the ongoing quarrel over the name and symbols of the RUC.
In Belfast, the Rev Ian Paisley was in vintage form as he called for the flying of the Union Jack over government buildings. What emerged from the speeches on both sides was how powerfully divisive these issues relating to flags and symbols remain, even when much more difficult problems - the release of terrorist prisoners, for example - have been resolved.
For many unionists the decision of the two Sinn Fein ministers not to allow the Union flag to be flown over their departmental buildings is seen as a deliberate flaunting of the party's new power and authority. More important, they claim it represents a pulling back from the spirit of the Belfast Agreement, when republicans signed up to the principle of consent and accepted that Northern Ireland would remain a part of the United Kingdom until a majority decided otherwise.
Martin McGuinness argues, equally forcefully, that the agreement is about parity of esteem and that both traditions should be given equal recognition, even on the flagpoles. In between are those who demonstrate moral courage by appealing for compromise for the sake of the greater good.
Sean Farren of the SDLP is among this number. He feels a particular loyalty to the Irish Tricolour which, to him, symbolises the desire for "peace, reconciliation and unity". The Union flag evokes no similar warmth but he is willing to recognise its importance to unionists. Until a set of common symbols can be agreed - a process which is likely to take some time - he intends to observe the status quo and allow the Union flag to fly in his department on designated days.
Very many people, even in this State, view Northern Ireland's obsession with symbols - when and where particular flags may be flown, the name and badge of the RUC - as particularly unfortunate in the broader context of the Belfast Agreement. One often hears the comment that it's about time both sides grew up. But the quarrel predates the present troubles.
Some historians argue that the most recent stage of the conflict began in 1964, when Ian Paisley demanded that the RUC should remove the Tricolour from the window of the republican election offices in West Belfast. It was a challenge which the police embraced with such enthusiasm that it led to several days of rioting.
The symbolism of Northern Ireland's quarrel sometimes seems to be more intractable than the substance of its divisions. Political leaders from opposing sides have found resources within themselves to agree a new dispensation. Honourable and courageous decisions have been made to find a formula to deal with issues such as decommissioning.
This week, the British government has moved to allay nationalist concerns over policing by providing for greater public accountability by the new police service. Yet here, too, the question of symbols - a new badge, how the name of the RUC should be incorporated into the "title deeds" of the new force - continue to cause anger and fear among unionists.
Peter Mandelson hopes that the passage of time will help. In an interview with Gerry Moriarty in this newspaper yesterday, he said: "Like so many things in Northern Ireland, time heals, it changes perceptions. There is a time for doing everything, but not necessarily here and now."
Martin McGuinness has urged the Northern Ireland Secretary to stay out of the quarrel over what flags should fly over what buildings, and leave it to the Assembly to work out a solution. If that can be done, it will be a fine thing. But the last thing the newly reconvened institutions need now is a series of bruising debates of the kind that took place last Tuesday. That goes for all the pro-agreement parties, including Sinn Fein. There are other ways of representing its constituents' interests.
As the decision of South Carolina's state congress shows, history - with a little help from economic self-interest - will deal with the flags.