It could all have been so easily avoided. Had the governments and the parties decided to nominate a full executive last July instead of just David Trimble and Seamus Mallon, we might never have got into this mess.
That's a view held widely on the nationalist side of the peace process. Anyone who was there the day Mr Trimble and Mr Mallon were designated as First Minister and Deputy First Minister will recall the atmosphere of the Assembly's first meeting. When people decide to be brave they are usually generous as well and there was a genuine air of reconciliation in the interest of the wider community.
Remember that the politicians had come through the grueling negotiations leading to Good Friday, followed by the internal party debates on the agreement, the referendum campaign and then the Assembly elections. Small wonder they weren't thinking ahead. There was a minority opinion for moving ahead to nominate the full executive. The bureaucratic details could have been polished or long-fingered and there could even have been rapid agreement on the number of ministers, in the interests of forward movement. But other voices intervened, cautioned that it would be necessary to nominate chairs and vice-chairs of committees as well and there simply wasn't time to do all that.
It was foolish of course, considering the vast amounts of time that have been squandered since then teasing out the various aspects of the decommissioning debate. But we live and learn.
The setting of a deadline was critical to securing the Good Friday pact. The same approach is being tried now by the two governments. May 14th is rapidly becoming a day of infamy in unionist mythology because that was when the UK Prime Minister, according to the mythologists, browbeat David Trimble into accepting a document he couldn't possibly sell to his Assembly party.
But reports of Mr Trimble's demeanour as he emerged from Downing Street that day do not suggest a man bullied into submission. A more plausible theory is that he fell victim to the seductive atmosphere of Downing Street and New Labour's discreet charm.
The world looks very different sitting in Mr Blair's parlour than in a meeting of Ulster Unionist Assembly Members at Stormont. Not attuned to the subtleties of diplomatic language, the sturdy Ulster folk took a cursory glance at the Downing Street draft, saw that prior decommissioning was not explicitly mentioned and they despaired. Sources said that, heads in their hands, they wondered what their leader had done.
What he had done was fall in line with Tony Blair's reality-check. The Prime Minister obviously learned at Hillsborough that prior decommissioning was not on - no matter how much this was disguised by the notion of a collective act of reconciliation.
Political insiders say that if Hillsborough had been played differently, it might just have worked. The media spotlight and the need for the prime ministers, especially Mr Blair, not to emerge from a week of talks empty-handed, dictated the publication of the half-baked declaration.
"We must lay the horses gently," a former Northern Secretary once said, during a session of Anglo-Irish negotiations. But Hillsborough was the equivalent of a £5,000 bet on an outsider half-an-hour before the off.
Opinions vary as to whether the d'Hondt procedure will be run and ministers nominated next week. There is pressure to convene the Assembly as early as possible and get the business over with. Nationalists argue that a positive stance by Mr Trimble and his party will benefit the Ulster Unionist standard-bearer and victim of the tabloid press, Jim Nicholson, in the European election.
Others shake their heads. It is easy to be brave when it's not you taking the risks, they say. The argument goes that, as things stand, and despite shipping a lot of water, the UUP should hold the third seat in Europe, perhaps on the 10th or 11th count after Dr Paisley and Mr Hume have romped home. The decision effectively rests with Mr Trimble and his advisers but the conventional wisdom at present is that it would be better to wait until the voters have had their say on June 10th. In the time-honoured American phrase, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Dublin is resigned to waiting, but not for long.
The Ulster Unionists have been quite open at all times about their desire to "play it long" when it comes to setting up the institutions in the Belfast Agreement. There are moments when nationalists suspect it is not so much a matter of unionists swaying their own doubters, more a game-plan to wreck the peace process by attrition.
Did Tony Blair get it wrong on May 14th? Was this a mistake equivalent in historical import to Harold Wilson's infamous description of Northern loyalists as spongers? Dissident unionists hope he has. They are making threatening noises already about running their own procedure for getting rid of the leader or at least limiting his room to manoeuvre so that he never lets Sinn Fein within an ass's roar of government without up-front decommissioning of IRA weapons.
All it takes is 60 delegates to the Ulster Unionist Council, governing body of the party, to call an extraordinary meeting where the leader and/or his political approach could be challenged. Some of Mr Trimble's friends even feel it might be good for him to see off a challenge to his leadership, following which the party would be firmly under his control.
There is another prognosis, shared even by some dissident unionists. The Assembly party reacted in shock to the Downing Street draft but between now and June 30th the prospect of returning to the political wilderness, minus salary, expenses and prospects of advancement, to march up hill and down dale once again as they did in the futile protests against the Anglo-Irish Agreement, will lose its attractions.
At the moment the result hangs in the balance. Mr Trimble's leadership skills face a major test. He puzzled many by flying off to the US and Canada this week. He returns today but is due to visit Israel for a few days from Friday to receive an honorary doctorate in Tel Aviv. The prospect of arranging a meeting between their leader and the newly elected Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, seems distinctly more appetising to senior unionists at the moment than providing the keys for two ministerial Mercs to Sinn Fein.
The orthodox approach to political leadership would have Mr Trimble campaigning night and day for Mr Nicholson, seeking to ensure his success. But Mr Trimble's style was never orthodox and the Ulster Unionists are anything but an orthodox political party. Politicians and officials who operate in more conventional environments are shaking their heads, pronouncing Mr Trimble's conduct "bizarre". But leave aside the physical presence, because Mr Trimble's biggest favour to his Euro-candidate may be refusing to co-operate in the nomination of ministers ahead of polling-day. Were he to do so, he might flush out internal opponents who have been refraining from disowning the Nicholson candidature up to now.
There is a big question-mark in the minds even of senior figures in this peace process as to whether the two prime ministers, who co-operate so closely, have a long-term strategy or are just making it up as they go along. Was Tony Blair motivated by pique on May 14th? Did he simply decide enough was enough and he wasn't going to take any more unionist shilly-shallying, or was he making a deliberate and well-thought-out move towards the long-overdue implementation of the agreement?
Republicans in particular are watching for a Blair backtrack. They wonder how serious he is about the June 30th deadline which he has described as "absolute" without defining what he means. There are others who believe the Prime Minister should have marched his unionist best-buddy out in front of the waiting media on May 14th, waving the Downing Street draft and saying: "Look what we have just agreed." Insiders say Tony Blair is providing proper meals now at Downing Street instead of the previous diet of tea and sandwiches. But clearly there is no free lunch.