Sinn Fein demanded a fixed date for the start of all party negotiations. They have it now. They wanted an absence of preconditions before such talks begin. They have that too, though - semantic to the end - there are the makings of a suggestion that the requirement of a reinstituted ceasefire before they can talk to ministers, as opposed to officials, may be regarded as a precondition. They want full acknowledgment of their electoral mandate, disregarding the fact that they diminish the electoral mandates - against violence - of other political parties as long as they are equivocal about the use of gun and bomb. Fulfilment of this particular demand is in their hands and no one else's. The decision is theirs.
All the elements are now in place for Sinn Fein to claim credibly that they have secured what they wanted. But they continue to hesitate. If this is because they and the IRA need to have time to absorb the consequences of Wednesday's announcement by the two governments, few will consider that delay is unnecessary or unreasonable. Like everyone else at this stage, Sinn Fein and the IRA are facing a time of fundamental decision. Reflexes need to be deconditioned. The holding of talks with the widest ever agenda, and the aim of securing a permanent agreement, requires genuine commitment and willingness to compromise from all participants.
Sinn Fein's commitment, however, will be questioned if the delay is tactical and the issue of a resumption of the ceasefire is allowed to hang unresolved over the opening stages of the process announced on Wednesday. Mr Adams's description of the IRA as "totally sceptical and distrustful" about the British government's attitude after the ceasefire came into effect, is not the full tally of scepticism and distrust that currently needs to be overcome.
Mr Adams and Mr McGuinness, on the other hand, made it clear yesterday that they recognise and welcome the opportunity that now exists for negotiating a settlement. It has been arrived at by a difficult process that has taken six or seven years, possibly longer. In this time certain principles have evolved which are widely accepted as the new language of dialogue, such as recognition of the interlocked problems of relations in the North, between North and South, and between this island and Britain. Each of the political parties has its own notion of what these principles mean, but the basic acceptance of them will have a profound effect for politics in the future. How this will translate into institutions and practical relationships, is what the talks to start on June 10th will be about.
Nowhere is the ambivalence of the IRA more obvious than in Sinn Fein's statement after Mr Hume and Mr Adams met some of its representatives this week: "They noted also the IRA's commitments to its republican objectives, the commitment to the resolution of the conflict and the IRA's acknowledgment that an inclusive negotiated settlement is required." The organisation itself declared that it would "face up to our responsibilities; others need to do likewise". These words are intended to be deliberately vague and confusing. What is needed is a clear cut announcement that there will be no more bloodshed, and then democracy can have its bay.