To paraphrase Patrick Kavanagh, one of the saddest phrases in all the litanies of dread peace process phrases was heard at Stormont yesterday: soft landings. The British and Irish governments haven't given up on cracking the policing puzzle but, ominously, their thoughts are turning to means of cushioning a potential shuddering jolt to the Belfast Agreement.

While Ronnie Flanagan advertises for new recruits, Sinn Fein and the SDLP are playing a political poker game of the highest stakes over policing. If they refuse, or feel powerless to compromise and share the pot with their pro-agreement partners, then the DUP and everyone else opposed to the Good Friday deal should scoop the chips on the table.

As the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, said in the Dail yesterday, critical judgment calls - that will determine the security or otherwise of the agreement - must be made, and soon. Gerry Adams must finally decide whether what is on offer from the British government should be tested, or whether, without further movement from Tony Blair, Sinn Fein holds firm and says No to the policing package.

Seamus Mallon and John Hume, in the event of republicans digging in their heels, must decide between going it alone on policing or, confronted by the electoral threat from Sinn Fein, trying to play it tactically. For the SDLP, independent of Sinn Fein, to encourage nationalists to join the new service they may need the unequivocal nod of approval from Bertie Ahern, and the Catholic hierarchy, and maybe the GAA.

That primarily would involve the Taoiseach creating some distance between himself and Sinn Fein in the worrying knowledge that the IRA would be looking on very disapprovingly. One cannot predict what the Taoiseach will do in such an eventuality. But in the Dail yesterday, with his talk of more than 90 per cent progress, there was a sense of his saying to Sinn Fein, in particular, that this might be as good as it gets.

The mood last night was gloomy, though optimistic insiders were saying that while politicians were talking, anything was possible. And politicians are talking. The British Prime Minister is due to hold separate talks with John Hume and Seamus Mallon, and David Trimble at Downing Street today. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen, and the Northern Secretary, Dr John Reid, are scheduled to meet in Dublin tomorrow. One can expect continuing behind-the-scenes but equally top-level contact with Mr Adams and Martin McGuinness.

There's a consensus that with elections on the horizon there can be little life left in these talks. Friday week sees the pressure point of a scheduled North-South Ministerial Council summit when, in the absence of a deal, Mr Trimble will not nominate Mr McGuinness and fellow Sinn Fein Minister Bairbre de Brun to attend, with all the fireworks that that will provoke.

So, as Mr Ahern has acknowledged, Friday week is a loose deadline, although the summit could easily be postponed if there was a sense that agreement was subsequently, but quickly, possible on policing and demilitarisation and putting paramilitary weapons beyond use.

Arms and the watchtowers have not yet been resolved, but the view is that if policing can be fixed, it will be easier to establish a formula for step-by-step reciprocal gestures from the British army and IRA on dismantling the observation posts and somehow disposing of the Kalashnikovs.

The British insist, and the Irish Government appears to generally concede, that apart from some tweaking there is little more that they can or will offer on policing.

Most if not all of the SDLP demands can be met by actual measures or firm commitments, according to talks sources. Centrally, Sinn Fein wants amending legislation to beef up the powers of the Policing Board, the Police Ombudsman and the Oversight Commissioner so that the Chief Constable and the Northern Secretary will be more accountable for the actions of the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

The British compromise is a review chaired by the American Oversight Commissioner, Mr Tom Constantine, possibly in 12 months' time. During that period, at least test the adequacy of the new service and the accountability arrangements is the appeal from London and, it appears, also from Dublin. If the review finds that they are inadequate then change the legislation. But Sinn Fein wants amending legislation in advance.

The background talk yesterday was of the governments admitting defeat for the moment on policing, and in the face of Westminster and local elections putting the agreement into review until the autumn, perhaps without actually suspending the Executive, Assembly and institutions.

There is also a theory abroad that republicans are working to a Machiavellian project. Sinn Fein's Pat Doherty has stated that if it takes 12 months or more to shape policing to the liking of Sinn Fein, then so be it. This has prompted some suspicion that Sinn Fein is prepared to see the agreement fall in the expectation that a year or more down the line a better deal for republicans could be fashioned that would amount to joint British-Irish jurisdiction.

Another suspicion is that the total focus on policing is to mask the possibility that the IRA won't deliver on its pledge to put its arms beyond use.

There are counter-arguments here. One is that Mr Adams and Mr McGuinness have invested too much in the Belfast Agreement to adopt such a tricky strategy. They would be mindful of how a dangerous political vacuum would only be to the advantage of dissident republicans and the No groupings.

Perhaps a more important argument is that Sinn Fein must be aware that if this agreement is forced into review Mr Trimble will have no platform on which to campaign in the general and local elections. The agreement will be seen not to be working and No unionists will fully exploit that reality. It is difficult to see how Mr Trimble and the Yes wing of unionism could survive in such an eventuality.

The whole thesis of the agreement is that it has cross-community support. If it loses the bulk of unionists, as would appear inevitable in the absence of a deal now, then the agreement would face collapse, irrespective of initial "soft landings".

In short, the future of the agreement depends on Mr Trimble being able to hold the line. That depends on Mr Trimble being able to argue that the agreement is working. Without a deal on policing and arms, he is in no position to put any convincing arguments. Mr Adams and Mr Mallon understand that.

One senior SDLP figure, who wasn't necessarily reflecting Seamus Mallon's view, put it bluntly on policing this week. "It's a question of the lesser of two evils. Better take a risk on what's there than see it all crash."