THE peace process is not a three ring but a multi ring circus. Some of the rings interlock, such as the ones occupied by Sinn Fein and the IRA army council.

The tent resounds with noise and hubbub. The performers in the Irish, British and US government rings are busy holding meetings and working out formulae. Every so often the IRA ring sets off a bomb: the politicians and civil servants floored, but after a while they off their suits and get back to work.

It is hard to keep an eye on rings at once. The IRA ring is lit, and there are several different theories about what is going on there. All the scenarios fit, but the most plausible one is that the "doves" were manoeuvred into a new armed campaign by the "hawks".

However, the adverse international reaction is thought to have strengthened the hand of those who favour a restoration of the ceasefire. The "working assumption" is that if Mr Adams can be given a sufficiently convincing package to present to the IRA, then it may decide to stop shooting and bombing and give politics another try.

All roads seem to lead back to the Mitchell report. There is said to be regret in senior Tory circles that the Prime Minister was so quick to dismiss a document assembled with such care. For a while the US administration itself seemed to echo Mr Major's attitude to the report, which cannot have pleased its main author.

It is only now that the true worth of the report is becoming apparent in London and Washington. Therefore, it may be an appropriate time for the former US senator to reenter the peace process.

Mr Mitchell was due to meet Mr Major at Downing Street yesterday afternoon, but he was delayed by flight problems at Miami. He was scheduled to arrive in London at midnight last night, and Downing Street said it was "hopeful" the meeting could be rescheduled.

He is due in Dublin for a meeting with the Taoiseach and the Tanaiste this evening. He told the New York Times the meetings were at the invitation of both governments.

A man of many parts, Mr Mitchell national Crisis Group which is involved in the peace efforts in the former Yugoslavia. Naturally, this was to feature in yesterday's discussions with Mr Major, but there can be little doubt that Northern Ireland would have come up as well.

Government sources here are playing down the significance of Mr Mitchell's visit at this time, describing him as a "resource" available to the two governments if they need him. Other participants in the peace process believe Dublin and London him and that his role could be crucial.

FIANNA Fail has already called for Mr Mitchell's appointment as a peace envoy, but it is thought the title have an uncomfortable, Bosnia like resonance for the British. Since elasticity of language is a prime characteristic of the peace it should not be too difficult find him another label.

There is no doubt that Mr Mitchell is willing, even eager, to help. US sources said that, if asked, he would resume the peacemaker's role with alacrity. He has a strong personal commitment to the Irish peace process and is extremely well informed about it.

Indeed, he seems to have better antennae than either Dublin or London. Interviewed by David Frost on February 4th, he warned that "not all on republican side favour the ceasefire and the potential for some elements to take direct and violent action does remain". Five days later the bomb went off at Canary Wharf.

The type of role envisaged for Mr Mitchell would be that of guarantor - with the prestige and power of the White House behind him - that Britain would not renege on an agreement setting a specific date for all party talks.

Given the depths of scepticism among republicans about Britain's true intentions, Mr Mitchell has the potential to be the "clincher" in the argument for a restoration of the ceasefire. He is about the only figure on the scene who has won the trust of all sides.

But official sources in Dublin say Britain is unenthusiastic about "outside involvement" and does not think it necessary. Others point out that London's record in consolidating the peace has been less than impressive.

There was a note of urgency in Mr Mitchell's New York Times interview yesterday. He would be telling both governments that "there has to be a prompt agreement on beginning serious, all party negotiations to reach a political settlement".

The US administration has invested massive political capital in the peace process and is reluctant to see the opportunity lost through a combination of British lassitude and IRA violence. Mr Mitchell is waiting in the wings.