In London yesterday the political parties and the British and Irish governments were faced with a fudge too far. If someone had devised a Solomon-like formula to keep the Ulster Democratic Party (UDP) in the talks, the governments, and most of the parties, would have seized it gratefully.
Politics in Northern Ireland has often operated on the dodgy but necessary principle of "acceptable hypocrisy". For 30 years violence and politics have in a sense fed off each other, one influencing the other in a deadly cycle: the paramilitaries claiming political developments were dictated by their violence; the politicians claiming any lessening in violence was due to their initiatives.
This talks process, painstakingly developed since June 1996, was an attempt to find a political solution to the Northern conflict, and in so doing finally draw an absolute distinction between violence and politics. With a settlement the blurring of the edges would end, it was hoped.
But in the meantime the governments and most of the politicians had to deal with the real world. Hence the general willingness - albeit very reluctant in some quarters - to accept the fiction of complete loyalist and IRA ceasefires being in place.
The dogs on the streets understand the relationship between the UDP and the UDA, between Sinn Fein and the IRA, and between the Progressive Unionist Party (PUP) and the UVF. They also know that if the Mitchell Principles were applied rigorously the talks would be minus, not one, but three parties: the UDP, PUP, and Sinn Fein.
In various ways the three main paramilitary groupings - the IRA, the UVF and the UDA (using its UFF cover name) have broken their cessations. The most serious recent breaches were by the UDA, which as part of a socalled "measured military response", murdered Eddie Treanor, Larry Brennan, and Ben Hughes.
Since the UDA reinstituted its ceasefire two more Catholics have been murdered - John McColgan and Liam Conway. Nobody has admitted these killings, although security sources say there is no evidence to link the UDA to the deaths. The Sinn Fein president, Mr Gerry Adams, thinks differently however.
With the UDA statement admitting it was involved in killings, the pretence of UDP adherence to the Mitchell Principles could not be sustained. The options were for the party to be pushed from the talks, or to jump. There is some comfort that Mr Gary McMichael led his party from the talks yesterday, rather than be formally expelled.
The fact that the UDP was taking its own decision on the issue ensured that it could appear as master of its own destiny, and that face was saved. A humbled UDP ordered from the grandeur of Lancaster House would not have gone down well in the UDA heartland.
Dr Mo Mowlam and Mr David Andrews seemed almost at pains to stress that in the event of a plausible UDA cessation, the UDP would be back in the talks in a matter of weeks - perhaps six weeks to tie-in with the "decontamination period" Sinn Fein had to undergo after the second IRA ceasefire.
And even within that timeframe it would not be difficult for the UDP to be kept up to date on talks developments. The party may even be allowed retain its offices at Castle Buildings, Stormont and engage in bilateral or multilateral talks with other parties.
Here we're back to the "necessary hypocrisy". But, notwithstanding the genuine moral dilemma facing the governments, there's some merit in it. Mr McMichael and his deputy, Mr David Adams, have argued with conviction that they are genuinely committed to the process, they want it to work and they want the violence to end.
The governments have founded this process on the principle that a real solution is only possible if those linked to the main paramilitaries are involved. They are also operating on the principle that people such as Mr McMichael, Mr David Adams, Mr Gerry Adams, Mr Martin McGuinness, Mr David Ervine, and Mr Billy Hutchinson are genuine in seeking a reasonable settlement.
The talks have maybe four or five months left. But if they are to succeed, it's vital that events on the street don't wreck them.
And it's these events which are so unpredictable. The first test is for the UDA, an organisation that does not have the same discipline as the UVF or the IRA. Whether it can keep its young bloods in check, or whether it wants to - despite its reinstated ceasefire - is still open to question.
The Loyalist Volunteer Force appears to be working to a wrecking agenda. It opposes the talks, believes they are pro-nationalist, and may continue its sectarian war of attrition against Catholics. The organisation appears to be motivated by an almost Old Testament style fundamentalism by which it views every Catholic as the enemy.
If LVF killings continue then INLA killings will follow, possibly with a nod-and-a-wink connivance from the IRA. The Continuity IRA is also an incendiary factor, as evidenced over the weekend in Enniskillen.
If the LVF can be held in check - possibly through the "mainstream" loyalist paramilitaries exercising some serious muscle - then it is also feasible that the IRA would lean on the INLA and Continuity IRA to hold back.
In the past when Northern Ireland appeared on the edge of outright anarchy it always retreated from the brink. There appeared to be an unwritten acknowledgement that at some stage the killings had to stop - temporarily, at least. As fear stalks the streets that's the sole remaining hope for the talks and the North: a halt to the bloodshed.