CHRIS Hudson, the man chosen by the Ulster Volunteer Force as its intermediary in communicating with the Government, was asked on BBC Northern Ireland this week if he thought anyone in Dublin was listening to the worrying messages he conveyed from the loyalists.
He gave no false impression or reassurance. He said that while the Taoiseach, Mr Bruton, was probably the first Taoiseach to have really tried to understand unionism and loyalism, it was difficult to get people in Dublin to listen about the problems facing the loyalist paramilitaries in maintaining their ceasefire.
Mr Hudson, a founding member of the New Consensus and other peace movements in the Republic, which sought an end to the paramilitary campaigns of violence, was commenting on remarks by the loyalist politician, David Ervine, earlier this week that the UVF ceasefire was close to collapse.
Mr Ervine, the leader of the Progressive Unionist Party which is close to the UVF, had warned that unless there was some concession towards loyalists there would be an inevitable return to loyalist violence.
Within two days of Mr Ervine's statement, the UVF and UDA warned the Portadown loyalist, Billy Wright, and an associate to leave Northern Ireland.
If Wright remains in the North from tonight he is, effectively, under a sentence of death.
The challenge raised by Wright's insurrection against the mainstream loyalist paramilitary leaderships has brought the UVF and its counterpart, the Ulster Defence Association, together on a joint mission against their dissident elements.
Last Saturday night, an estimated 100 UDA men from Belfast visited the Co Down town of Dromore. They walked into pubs where it was felt there might be support for the dissidents. They read out statements saying disloyalty to the organisation's leadership would not be tolerated.
The Dromore action, it was made clear by the men who gathered in groups in the town centre, was a last warning.
The joint UVF and UDA threats reveal the growing nervousness among loyalists that their position is being undermined by a conspiracy between Irish nationalism and British indifference. Their position is one which nationalists and many politicians in the Republic find hard to appreciate.
However, loyalist sources indicate that the strategic decision to return to violence may have already been taken, and the question of when this occurs is dependent only on tactical grounds.
Mr Ervine was simply restating what sources close to the UVF leadership have been saying since the beginning of this month. One UVF source said the ending of the loyalist ceasefire was not so much a question of "if, as when".
The loyalists are bitterly angry about the fact that they have made no political or other gains as a result of their decision to hold their ceasefire.
The Progressive Unionists are particularly incensed about their experiences in Dublin during 1995 when they risked disavowal at home by meeting the Government.
The loyalists say that at none of the meetings were there any offers by the Government to declare non interference in the internal affairs of Northern Ireland or to propose the removal the jurisdictional claims on the North.
THE loyalists' decision to meet the Government led to political sniping in Belfast. Recently, this has increased with attacks by Ulster Unionists and Democratic Unionists claiming the loyalist political parties are unsafe on the question of the union and even communist", a reference to the PUP's left wing position on social issues.
Also, the loyalists have gained no significant concessions by way of prisoner releases despite their adherence to the ceasefire. UVF and UDA sources say the prisoners are being held as "hostages" to ensure their ceasefire is maintained.
Bitterness over this issue is mainly directed towards the British government, but they are also quick to blame Dublin, saying that while the Government moved quickly to release republican prisoners, it never offered to intercede on behalf of loyalists.
Loyalists accuse Dublin of adopting a completely nationalist stance in relation to the Orange confrontation at Drumcree. The appearance of observers" from the Labour and Fianna Fail parties at Drumcree and Derry during the loyalist demonstrations was seen as a deliberate act of provocation.
One loyalist asked this week what the Dublin establishment would think if British or Northern MPs arrived in north inner Dublin last week to "observe" the vigilante disturbances in Summerhill and then reported to the British Home Secretary.
Loyalist suspicion about Dublin's intentions is running close to paranoia at times. Two senior loyalists recently told The Irish Times that there is a commonly held view that the Government endorsed the eviction of the Protestant Graham family from their farm in Co Donegal merely because they were Protestants.
Some Border Protestants hold the view that there is a conspiracy in the Republic to drive Southern Protestant farmers off their land.
The deepening sectarian bitterness in rural areas west of the river Bann since Drumcree and the boycotts of businesses on purely sectarian grounds is adding to the sense of loyalist detachment.
Loyalist sources say it is this mounting sense of anger that has led to the moves against Billy Wright who, they say, was regarded until recently as an irrelevance.
The loyalists also say it was the Portadown unit of the UVF which killed Catholic taxi driver Michael McGoldrick during the period of the Drumcree stand off, and it was for this reason the unit was expelled from the UVF.
Despite this attempt to bring their most militant elements into line by expulsions and threats, the loyalists say, there is still no sense of their having benefited from maintaining a ceasefire.