WHEN the politicians departed from Castle Buildings, Stormont last week, leaving in transigence in sole possession of the negotiating table, it was predictable that its twin brother, violence, would again be out there, stalking the streets.
With four shots in a hospital corridor in West Belfast on Friday, the IRA demonstrated its adherence toe the Von Clausewitz principle that "war is nothing more than the continuation of politics by other means".
It might be argued that the die wash cast even earlier, when the British Prime Minister peremptorily short circuited attempts by the SDLP leader, Mr John Hume, to mediate circumstances which might have drawn the IRA into a new ceasefire declaration.
However, what "might have been" is now supplanted by the hard reality of what has happened politics has been eclipsed, at least temporarily, by the return of high risk brinkmanship through the use of, violence.
The loyalist gunmen have now apparently joined in the deadly poker game with the attempt to kill a leading republican in North Belfast yesterday.
Several imponderable will consequently make foreboding an unwelcome guest at festive tables in the North this week. Does the latest incident mean the loyalist paramilitaries as a whole, or just some of their less disciplined elements, have judged Friday's IRA attack as a step too far?
And does the combined impact of incidents signify the demise of the latest Hume Adams initiative, the inevitability of further IRA attacks and a consequent slide back into wider conflict? The continued public stance of the loyalist political spokesmen that their paramilitary colleagues must resist being drawn back into all out conflict may still have a slight chance of containing the situation.
The leashes may not yet have been slipped irrevocably on the loyalist murder, gangs. There is a strong possibility that their paramilitary leaders have decided on a "measure fob measure" response to the IRA's activities.
While yesterday's bomb incident, represents a grave and inexcusable escalation, it is certainly significant that the target chosen was a republican political activist, rather than a random group of Catholics in a bar or restaurant.
But there is little consolation in this, since recent history has shown that violence cannot long be "contained" in this manner. Inevitably, if the spiral continues to build, "easier" targets are chosen and the tentacles of the murder machine embrace politically uninvolved citizens on both sides of the divide.
After Friday's night's hospital attack, it at first seemed possible, that the loyalist paramilitaries might still hold back. Their doubts centred ironically, on the botched nature of the attack.
The IRA statement appeared to confirm that the operation was a deliberate murder attempt on the police officers. But, if so, it was un-typically inefficient. And certain aspects of the incident, and of the IRA statement, did not seem to fit past patterns.
Such attacks in the past have been carried out with a high level of pre planning, deliberation and purpose the perpetrators chosen so carefully and motivated so highly that they would be unlikely to panic and break off the operation without completing it.
Such circumstances as were known about the hospital attack left, room for some loyalist speculation that the IRA intentions may not have been as straightforward as described in their statement admitting responsibility.
Could the gunmen have been merely "stalking" Councillor Dodds' band his bodyguards perhaps doing a dummy run or targeting the politician and/or his minders for a possible future attack? Could they have been part of a maverick unit, on a purely opportunist mission? _
There Was even speculation, this being Belfast, that the IRA men were in fact scouting a completely different target when they were spotted, perhaps even seeking out one of their own for retribution over some internal feud.
In the event, these doubts proved not to be substantial enough, to militate against a loyalist tit for tat, riposte. They have now taken a step over the edge themselves. They seem to have sent a blunt message that each and every subsequent IRA, attack must expect retaliation.
So the question remains how long can the treadmill of violence be held at this level? For months, the IRA appears to have been operating a policy, not of "de facto ceasefire" as some nationalist politicians have claimed, but of "low intensity operations", the phrase coined by Gen Sir Frank Kitson.
They have teased and taunted both the loyalists and the British government by mounting sporadic, unpredictable attacks aimed at producing the political process forwards while still leaving their opponents unsure of their intent or their resolve to resume all out war.
Their bluff has now been called, and that phase of tactical brinkmanship has ended. The next phase, if, the IRA chooses to enter it as is all too likely will continue to involve brinkmanship but will carry a greatly magnified risk of descent pinto chaos.
The IRA's hospital attack was widely seen as heinous. The Sinn Fein reaction, when it came on Saturday morning, was handled by Mr Mitchel McLaughlin, who seems to be regularly assigned as the party's first response figure in such crises.
He reiterated the current standard Sinn Fein line on IRA attacks. This "terrible action", he argued, forced the need for everyone to redouble their efforts "to make sure such incidents never happen".
It is an argument becoming increasingly threadbare. Just as Mr, Major's present stance leaves open what form and duration of the absence or cessation of violence might make Sinn Fein, respectable enough to participate in talks, so the Sinn Fein line is designed to excuse more rationalise for political ends any number of IRA actions of what ever appalling nature.
Mr McLaughlin went on to suggest that if Mr Major stated that he would call immediate all party negotiations "then I believe that we can have an IRA cessation even before Christmas". Many people would, dearly like to perceive a ray of hope in this comment, but unionists, of course, would call it duplicity, and, their scepticism is reinforced by each successive IRA attack.
As both sides (the British government and the republicans) become more entrenched in their respective lines of reasoning, the prospects of any rapprochement seem to be fading. And if the loyalist paramilitaries have, in fact, now been drawn actively into the deadly game of raising the stakes and calling each other's bluff with human lives all pretence that constitutional politics can usefully influence the situation may finally be discredited.
FORTUNATELY, as Disraeli remarked, finality is not the language of politics. Although, in diplomatic terms relations are crumbling on all sides, it is apparent that Mr Hume will continue his dialogue with Mr Adams. Dublin, it seems so far, will maintain contacts with Sinn Fein through officials, and the White House Administration is still talking to Mr Adams.
There remains, also, an as yet unquantifiable element of positive potential in the resolve signalled by former Senator George Mitchell to explore the possibility of testing his authority as chairman of the multi party talks when the crucial decommissioning issue is addressed again in January.
Although Belfast at the weekend showed no signs of allowing the political gloom to dampen its determined party mode and all out shopping frenzy, there was a slight undercurrent of fatalism about the festivities much as the band continued to play on the Titanic.
