Ian Paisley has injected a new note of uncertainty into the peace process at a critically sensitive time, writes Gerry Moriarty, Northern Editor
The Rev Ian Paisley provided some lively theatre up at Parliament Buildings, Stormont, this week. It was vintage grandstanding from the Doc which, as the SDLP leader, Mr Mark Durkan, put it, swung from "the offensive to the farcical".
Mr Gerry Adams characterised some of his remarks as "pre-negotiations nerves". Sir Reg Empey of the Ulster Unionists said it was the stuff of the Dark Ages.
British and Irish officials attempted to portray it all as just "Paisley being the usual unpredictable Paisley". That's true, of course, but that very unpredictability raises questions about whether the DUP can deliver a deal, were it so minded.
In the face of all key negotiations most parties engage in bluff and bluster. Everyone expects and tolerates these mind games. But did Dr Paisley stretch that hard-balling to a dangerous extreme this week?
His talk about "Romanist" journalists was unsurprising and as far as most thick-skinned hacks were concerned all rather harmless and indeed amusing. And spurning the hand of friendship from Archbishop Seán Brady was just what anyone would expect from the leader of the Free Presbyterian Church.
Warning that there was no chance of a deal unless the IRA went out of business and disarmed was utterly in keeping with the party line - and the line of everyone else, apart from Sinn Féin. But suggesting in a bizarre, confusing press conference at Stormont on Thursday evening that even if the IRA exited the stage his party might not sit down with Sinn Féin sent a nervous tremble through the whole process.
Certainly it was typical Paisley, and most journalists would agree that Northern politics would be a tedious business without him. But his comments over Wednesday and Thursday can't just be dismissed as the DUP leader playing to the gallery.
It was all of that, but it creates a dangerous volatility factor that could yet jeopardise the Leeds Castle talks in Kent on Friday week. Dr Paisley's deputy, Mr Peter Robinson, and new recruit, Mr Jeffrey Donaldson, made it abundantly clear during the summer that were the IRA to disarm and pension itself off that the DUP would parley with Sinn Féin.
When the verbally adroit Mr Robinson faced the press yesterday he managed to avoid a charge of insubordination from his leader while saying that, yes, the DUP would treat with Sinn Féin if the IRA"divvied up".
Some DUP sources also stress that Dr Paisley in his general comments said the parties could quickly hammer out a deal if the IRA disarmed and effectively disbanded - and that his other remarks really were just a visceral reaction to some newspaper reports suggesting that he was dying of prostate cancer.
"He was very hurt and very upset, and so was his family, and that's why he came out in the way he did," said one senior party figure.
Sources insisted that the party was not deviating from the comments of Mr Robinson and Mr Donaldson. "If you sift through what Dr Paisley said this week it was clear that if the IRA decommissioned and disbanded everything was possible after that," said the party insider.
"And as regards Dr Paisley saying he would not deal with Sinn Féin even if the IRA came up to the mark, the point is that Sinn Féin would then be an immeasurably different organisation. So while I can understand that there might have been some confusion nothing has really changed," he added.
If a deal is to be thrashed out at Leeds Castle the main business must be concluded between Sinn Féin and the DUP. They are the parties with the power to deliver the two main issues: decommissioning and effective disbandment of the IRA, and unionists fully signing up to power-sharing.
While republicans say they are familiar with the antics of Dr Paisley equally they are now querying whether, were a deal to be hammered out at Leeds Castle, Dr Paisley would thunder in to the final press conference and blow everything apart. It's a reasonable question.
The DUP won't talk to Sinn Féin but, if that problem is to be set aside, and the necessary mutual reassurances provided, then somehow or other, with the help of the British and Irish governments, some sort of trust must be established between these parties. And quickly.
"Look, in any high-wire negotiations you have to know what the other side is thinking," a senior Sinn Féin strategist explained. "That means creating space in which either side can securely and confidentially make their points. It involves some clever tic-tacking and discussions, but that is not happening here. And that worries us because after what Ian Paisley said this week we are not sure of the DUP's position."
He queried, too, whether all the groundwork could be completed ahead of the Leeds Castle talks. Aside from the main arms and power-sharing issue, the governments and the parties made some progress on important peripheral matters such as ministerial accountability, voting arrangements and the powers of the Office of First and Deputy First Ministers.
Dublin and London are certainly not even hinting at this stage that Leeds Castle may have to be postponed, but it is also clear that between now and Friday week the governments, their top officials and the parties will have their work cut out to ensure that they enter Leeds Castle with a tight, clearly focused agenda.
There is a danger that the talks could get clogged up with issues other than the important ones, guns and government.
"At this stage it's looking very difficult," was the disquieting line from the Sinn Féin insider yesterday.