THE Northern peace process may be stuck on a sandbank with no sign of a rising tide, but in spite of the huffing and puffing on board the stranded vessel there appears to be no real imminent danger of it sinking.
Like any grounded ship, it is vulnerable and the alarmist noises emanating from all sides certainly reflect an increasing loss of confidence in its stability.
However, the reality which has begun to emerge is that nobody is yet ready to lead the rush to the lifeboats. Yesterday, UDA sources began to qualify and moderate the significance of the statement by a section of the loyalist paramilitary prisoners that they were withdrawing support for the peace process.
Spokesmen said this did not mean that they actually wanted to see an end to the loyalist ceasefire. Moreover, it has become evident that UVF prisoners have not concurred with the line taken by the UDA and UFF. Their assessment of the situation, following consultations already under way, is likely to emerge by the end of the week.
The players in the inter party talks at Stormont, meanwhile, have shown no intentions of abandoning the process, however frustrating it has become. Dr Paisley yesterday voiced the DUP's firm intention of remaining in the talks if only to keep an eye on its UUP rivals. Mr David Trimble and the UUP delegation, likewise, seem content to stay in the system, confident that they can keep firm control of its pace and direction.
Everybody is aware that the edifice is fragile and hollow so far, but nobody is willing to be tagged with responsibility for pulling out and allowing it to collapse. There would be serious public, and therefore electoral, consequences for any party seen as sabotaging the hopes, however slim, placed in the talks process.
Yet the UDA prisoners' initiative is a serious one, contributing to the general destabilisation of the political situation. There is certainly more than a grain of truth in Dr Paisley's suggestion yesterday that the expectations raised among the prisoners at the start of the ceasefire have not been fulfilled.
Their apparent swing towards militancy certainly reflects A severe disenchantment with the stagnation of the political process as much as it was prompted by recent manifestations of continued IRA activity.
The loyalist ceasefire is certainly under strain and just as much as on the republican side the treatment and prospects of their prisoners is a vital factor in the overall picture.
Archbishop Robin Eames cautiously hinted as much in his comment yesterday about the conduct of the loyalist paramilitary groupings over the past two years. I'm not certain that they have received sufficient credit for maintaining their ceasefire," Dr Eames remarked.
But the broad assessment must be that the loyalist paramilitary leadership is cohesive and steady enough to take a balanced overview of the situation and refrain from precipitate measures. The republican movement, while it considers the fate of its prisoners to be a paramount factor, has not allowed this element to deflect it from its primary political strategy, and the same is likely to apply to the loyalist leaders.
The prisoners' discontent however, certainly highlights the undoubted gravity of the hiatus in the peace process generally. What has emerged, superficially, is that the rumblings concerning the loyalist ceasefire have been turned into renewed pressure for a reinstatement of the IRA ceasefire.
Unfortunately, in the game of nerves and war dances which is now being played, the reality is that republicans are also likely to be unimpressed.
Just as the decommissioning wrangle among the politicians has no real prospect of influencing the paramilitaries, the apparent portents of a collapse of the loyalist ceasefire arc unlikely to elicit a formal cessation of military activities by republicans only a credible political initiative might achieve that.
Nonetheless, the loyalists can clearly perceive that the IRA campaign continues to be "on hold" in the North for the present. They are acutely watching developments and highly nervous about the role of fringe republican groups, but still conscious that the IRA leadership is probably at least as worried about such factors as they are.
The grave consequences of any unilateral move which could topple the situation back into open conflict are keenly appreciated by both sides, and this is perhaps the sole hopeful element in the present volatile situation.
Nonetheless, while the political deadlock continues the danger is ever present that unpredictable events and malign fringe elements have the potential to exert an undue, and even catastrophic influence on the course of events.
The political "vacuum" which Mr Gerry Adams referred to yesterday will inevitably be filled in some manner. That is the lesson of Northern history over the past four years of political posturing and jousting.
The constitutional politicians, if they are not to leave their people to the vagaries of chance and maverick extremism, must assume the reins and restore momentum to the peace process or at least give a convincing impression that they have the will to do so.