There is probably an instruction in the republican handbook to the effect: keep them guessing, keep them confused.

The IRA issues a statement, and Sinn Fein stands back and says: "Sorry, we couldn't possibly offer any interpretation of its content. Figure it out yourselves."

Reaction and analysis, accordingly, came in a variety of forms, some positive, some negative, some predictable. Typical of the IRA, it provides semantic material for pessimists and optimists alike. Interpretation can be as malign as the IRA preparing to return to war, or as benign as republicans stating they still want a deal.

The British and Irish governments and the pro-agreement parties, excluding Sinn Fein, of course, were calling for an IRA statement, but certainly the one carried in yesterday's An Phoblacht was not what they were seeking: no commitment, implicit or explicit, to start decommissioning, no pledge that the IRA war is over for good.

Unionists speak of a "veiled threat" of a return to IRA violence. The line in the statement about the first IRA cessation of 1994 having "floundered" on the Tory demand for disarmament prompted some unionists to argue that this was tantamount to the IRA saying it was preparing another Canary Wharf, the London bombing in February 1996 which ended the first ceasefire.

The heavy emphasis on apportioning blame to Mr Tony Blair and Mr David Trimble for the current stalemate was also viewed in some unionist quarters as the IRA seeking pre-emptive justification for retreating to the nihilistic comfort of "doing what they do best".

Mr Jeffrey Donaldson said the talk by Mr Blair and Mr Ahern of a "seismic shift" in republican thinking was bunkum. Mr Sammy Wilson of the DUP, always good for a sharp line, declared: "The only seismic shift that the IRA intends to make is the shift caused by their next bomb."

The Ulster Unionist Party leader naturally deplored the statement, describing it as "offensive" and "menacing". But Mr Trimble showed some restraint in his response.

One knowledgeable unionist observer saw the statement as a "holding operation" to see republicans through the potentially wicked month of August and into the start of the review on September 6th, as determined yesterday by Senator George Mitchell.

The statement should also be judged in the face of grassroots republican uncertainty. Shortly before it was released to the press on Wednesday night, the dissident 32 County Sovereignty Movement was complaining of "the humiliating defeat" that "that small elitist group, the Provisional leadership" was trying to "sell".

Mr Gerry Adams and his senior colleagues will probably take holidays in August. But the time will also be used to keep the grassroots on board the process. "Family" meetings where republicans will be briefed on the current state of the political process are being arranged. "We'll let them shout at us," as one Sinn Fein official put it.

Pro-agreement parties such as the SDLP and Alliance complained that the IRA announcement was hardly facilitating attempts to break the logjam. Dr Mo Mowlam spoke of the statement being "unhelpful" and doing nothing to foster trust between the two main protagonists, Sinn Fein and the Ulster Unionists.

London and Dublin were far from pleased with the IRA missive. They would have liked a lot more but there was also some relief that the statement was ambiguous and open to such wide interpretation.

After what republicans viewed as unionist rejection of their "seismic shift" on arms - whether real or illusory - and the tragi-comedy of the depressing, farcical attempt to form an executive last week, Mr Tony Blair and Mr Bertie Ahern probably realised that this was not the time for republican generosity.

Mr Martin McGuinness spoke to various media yesterday in London to say that decommissioning by May, as suggested by the Belfast Agreement, was now "nigh on impossible." He spoke on BBC of "there not being a snowball's chance in hell of decommissioning" by that date.

This prompted a Sinn Fein spokesman to stress that his sentence was qualified and should be quoted in full: "I don't think that there is a snowball's chance in hell of there being decommissioning by that time if the Ulster Unionist Party continue with their rejectionist approach. And I have told Tony Blair and David Trimble in the course of the last two weeks that on this issue I believe that they have more influence than I have."

Mr Ahern was not saying yea or nay about the statement, but Dublin sources drew comfort from elements of the IRA message. The line about calling two ceasefires to underline "our definitive commitment" to the success of the peace process was viewed as positive.

While the IRA complained that those who were demanding decommissioning were effectively endorsing "in the current political context . . . the failed agenda which seeks the defeat of the IRA", Dublin was focusing on the phrase "in the current political context".

A reasonable interpretation here, it was being argued, was the IRA saying that with the right context - an executive and devolution being established - disarmament might still follow. It was emphasised that while the IRA did not promise decommissioning, neither did it rule it out.

There is always the danger of either engaging in wishful thinking or being overly pessimistic when covering Northern politics. The IRA statement will have triggered understandable concern, but there is no gainsaying that it did not take from the fact that if the Belfast Agreement is to be rescued it is still down to the politicians, chiefly Sinn Fein and the Ulster Unionists, to do the business.

Of course, it is for the IRA to decide whether to disarm. But come September, with the US cavalry in the form of Senator George Mitchell riding in from the west, it is for Mr David Trimble and Mr Gerry Adams to find common ground to break the deadlock and allow the guns to be put beyond use.

It is still mainly about politics. If politics does not succeed, then what comes after is another day's work.