Analysis: It is questionable how advantageous the Dublin Government's 'sensitivity' to the UUP leader's difficulties has been, writes Frank Millar.
The appointment of the Independent Monitoring Commission was meant to mark a significant political victory for the embattled Ulster Unionist leader, Mr David Trimble. He was quick to claim one, and the Irish Government was every bit as keen as the British that he should have it.
However, scrutiny of the draft international agreement establishing the four-man body makes it difficult to sustain the UUP leader's assertions: that meaningful new sanctions are now available to be deployed against paramilitary-related parties deemed in breach of their commitments to exclusively peaceful means; that Dublin has been excluded from matters pertaining to the composition of the internal government of Northern Ireland; or that a unilateral power of action is now vested in the British Secretary of State.
To the contrary it would seem, as Mr Jeffrey Donaldson protested last night, that "the hermetic seal on Strand One" - the principle that the internal affairs of Northern Ireland are for the parties there and the British government alone - has been broken.
Even before yesterday's formal announcements in London and Dublin, Irish sources were helpfully pointing up the provision in Article 6 of the draft agreement in respect of any claim by any party that a minister in the Stormont executive had failed to observe the terms of his or her pledge of office, or that a party was not committed to such of its members as are or might become ministers observing the terms of that pledge.
In what was clearly intended as Dublin's major concession to Mr Trimble, Article 6 (2) goes on to say that, insofar as any such claim "relates to the operation of the institutional arrangements under Strand One of the multiparty agreement, the claim shall be considered only by those members of the commission appointed by the British government."
The Irish "spin" was that here was proof of what the Taoiseach had said all along, that Mr Donaldson and Lord Kilclooney (formerly John Taylor MP) had been wrong, because Dublin had absolutely no desire to be involved in the internal affairs of the Assembly.
Which should be a tremendous boost to Mr Trimble at Saturday's meeting of the Ulster Unionist Council - if that were the whole of the story.
However, Article 4 of the draft agreement leaves it for the commission as a whole to monitor any continuing paramilitary activity and to assess whether the leaderships of such organisations are directing such activity or seeking to prevent it.
And Article 6 makes clear that the commission as a whole will report to both the British and Irish governments about any such claims and make recommendations as to what measures may be taken by the Northern Ireland assembly.
What is not yet clear - and will only become clear from the British legislation, expected shortly - is what happens if the assembly fails to act on a recommendation of the commission, on the basis of cross-community consent. In their joint statement last April the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, and the British Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, said "it would be a matter for the British government, in consultation with the Irish Government, to resolve the matter in a manner consistent with the report" of the independent monitoring body.
Does "consultation" with the Irish Government necessarily mean the British would only act by agreement with Dublin? Or is the British Secretary of State to enjoy a unilateral power to act to exclude an individual or parties in line with a recommendation from the commission in the face of Irish opposition or, for that matter, where he feels it appropriate even in the absence of a recommendation from the commission?
Throughout the recent negotiations British sources have stressed the extent of Dublin's sensitivity to Mr Trimble's difficulty with this proposal as a means of assisting the restoration of the Stormont executive. However, until we have the answers to these questions, it remains unclear precisely how "helpful" they have been and questionable whether Mr Trimble will derive any major benefit.