Analysis:Partnership between Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness makes history but does not end it, writes Frank Millarat Stormont.
The siege was finally lifted here yesterday. Nine years after the Belfast Agreement the two communities in the still-divided polity of Northern Ireland were given a second chance of a new beginning.
And appropriately enough, for those mindful of the history of the Maiden City, the leading roles were played by a proud Derry Catholic and an equally staunch octogenarian Protestant Apprentice Boy . . .
Have they the cut of political greats, these men, Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness? Have they that rare but sometimes vital ability to effect the perfect U-turn and transcend their own pasts to shape a new and once unimaginable future? Some will find the very suggestion risible, evidence only of the enormous hype surrounding yet another "historic" step in a process that has at times seen language devalued and degraded. The new First and Deputy First Ministers may indeed have made history.
But there is no purpose or advantage in denying that many here still don't like it or trust it.
SDLP leader Mark Durkan asked just a few months back whether those who he charged had "given us the worst of our past" could now provide "the best of our future". Many more throughout this island believe that it will require further change in the character and disposition of these parties - change every bit as radical as that which has transformed the old Stormont seat of government over which they now preside in partnership.
For those who admire realpolitik and its practice, on the other hand, the slaughter of sacred cows in the acquisition and division of power has already produced a political feast of truly international flavour reflected in yesterday's celebrity guest list.
We can forget mention of Nelson Mandela and FW De Klerk. Much though Sinn Féin likes it, the South African analogy does not hold. Yet domestic comparisons struggle to do justice to the staggering changes rung by these two men. Tony Blair's Clause 4 moment against Old Labour? Even Bertie Ahern's unsentimental abandonment of Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution?
Nor is it quite Paisley playing De Gaulle leaving Algeria; although Nixon going to China might seem more apt. Such examples are invariably cited to illustrate the change produced in the political weather when the strong man of the right confounds his traditionalists, thinks the unthinkable and occupies new ground.
What of the strong man on the republican left? We have grown to taking the Provisional IRA's cessation for granted. In contemporary terms now for impact we might think Hamas renouncing violence and recognising the state of Israel. Tony Blair is fond of saying that republicans were unlike the new breed of international terrorists who are prepared to kill without limit.
However, they did once vow to drive the British out of Northern Ireland and to claim power with an Armalite in one hand and a ballot paper in the other.
Paisley, meanwhile, says he would not represent his office in the event of a papal visit.
But some disillusioned Free Presbyterians could not feel more betrayed had he joined the World Council of Churches and campaigned for Christian unity.
Sensitive souls on either side may dismiss such comparisons as froth and foolishness. However, this is not to mock but to marvel rather at the journey these two men and their comrades and colleagues have undertaken. We are talking epic change already here.
After all, Prime Minister Blair and Taoiseach Ahern hardly flew in to witness the natural coming together of two powersharing parties whose success had only been delayed some 30 years because of hardline opposition from within their extended political families.
While this new partnership is undoubtedly strong on promise, with so much necessary and awaited in terms of delivery, it is also to signal the distance still to be travelled.
There was a sense of that awareness from Paisley, who stressed this was but the beginning. And from McGuinness, who spoke with powerful enthusiasm of the challenge ahead, the most exciting of their lives as he described it. Listening to the Deputy First Minister it was possible to grasp Paisley's newfound confidence that they are indeed embarked upon a road on which, this time, there would be no turning back.
Blair paid tribute to the contribution of others along the way. He was plainly moved by what he saw and heard, and by the applause greeting Ahern's acknowledgment that it would not have happened without this British prime minister's commitment and determination.
Ahern, too, found powerful voice for this occasion. It was salutary to reflect that it was the Taoiseach in this gathering who spoke for the Irish people in demanding that "this should be the last generation to feel the anger and pain of old quarrels".
Big moments like this can undoubtedly play their part in recasting the political landscape. However, they do not of themselves constitute the enduring solution. As Blair said after his 1997 election victory, enough of talking, it is time to do.
Old habits and attitudes will have to be discarded if a unique political system promising consensus, equality and parity of esteem is to be made to work.
Articulating support for the rule of law is not the same as building and sustaining a culture of lawfulness.
Paramilitaries on both sides have yet to be disbanded, and for too many in both communities everyday life is conducted against a prevailing counter-culture of intimidation and fear. About 57 "peace walls" still attest to an apartheid state of living that must be an affront in any democracy.
Paisley has said that he and McGuinness are engaged in a "work-in" rather than a "love-in". But if not love, the active promotion of reconciliation must surely become a defined objective of a shared administration promising to govern on behalf of all the people.
Which, of course, brings us to the biggest unknown of all. Can this be "a settlement" capable of forging what we have never known before - namely a common allegiance to Northern Ireland.
It is plainly in the unionist interest that it should.
But how over time will that sit alongside Sinn Féin's commitment to political process providing the transition to Irish unity? They made history here yesterday. But they didn't end it.