Republicans are being encouraged to read the Blair speech carefully before making their feelings known, writes Gerry Moriarty, Northern Editor
It's what's not being said that is interesting in terms of the initial republican response to Mr Tony Blair's keynote Belfast speech: the old Sherlock Holmes dog that didn't bark.
Had they so wished, Mr Gerry Adams and Mr Martin McGuinness could have portrayed the British Prime Minister's exegesis of what is required to rescue the peace process as equivalent to the machinations of that other Arthur Conan Doyle character, the evil Professor Moriarty (no relation).
In previous days we might have expected rants and rallies and hard-line comments from the Sinn Féin heavyweights bemoaning the lack of understanding at how far and how much Sinn Féin and the IRA had delivered and reiterating that more than 90 per cent of violence these days emanates from loyalists - or to use the new Sinn Féin jibe, from "unionist" paramilitaries.
Albert Reynolds on a number of BBC outlets on Thursday opened the door for republicans by complaining that Mr Blair's speech was heavily weighted against the IRA while almost ignoring loyalist paramilitary violence.
Certainly republicans have been making such points, but in an even-tempered manner. Some also acknowledge that Mr Blair depicted most of the loyalist groupings as little more than common criminals whose loyalty was to self-interest rather than to the crown. The policy of the Sinn Féin leadership so far is to keep the ship of reaction very steady.
Mr Gerry Adams probably called it correctly when he said yesterday that the preliminary response of republicans was one of anger and disappointment. Why, republicans were wondering, was the concentration on the IRA, and why was the Taoiseach applauding the "robust" nature of Mr Blair's address at the Harbour Commissioners on Thursday? the Sinn Féin president asked.
But, sources close to Mr Adams conceded, the reason for the extra spotlight on the IRA and Sinn Féin could be that journalists, as is our nature, concentrated on the key aspect of Mr Blair's speech: seeking dramatic movement from the IRA and in return promising speedy implementation of outstanding elements of the agreement including demilitarisation.
There were other elements of the speech that should be considered, Mr Adams said. For instance, Mr Blair acknowledging the crucial role Sinn Féin played in the peace process and his "frank admission" that for years nationalists had had to endure "second-class" status in Northern Ireland.
A close associate of Mr Adams said that, while Sinn Féin felt there was too much focus on the IRA, republicans should forget about the television soundbites from Mr Blair's speech and consider the full address "in the round".
To that end rank-and-file republicans, notwithstanding their initial anger, were being encouraged to obtain copies of Mr Blair's full speech and to read it carefully, and then to make their feelings knows to the republican leadership.
Those in Sinn Féin who would like the IRA to retire from the plot hope that grass roots will pay particular attention to Mr Blair's implicit argument that IRA activity is counterproductive to Sinn Féin's grand electoral project in the North and South.
But, for the moment the speech strengthens Mr Trimble's position by generally being in line with his analysis.