The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Burke, spoke on Tuesday about the political parties taking a "leap of faith" on whether the IRA and loyalist paramilitaries will disarm during the talks process.
Today the Northern Secretary, Dr Mo Mowlam, is expected to declare her conviction that the IRA ceasefire is genuine in word and in deed and that Sinn Fein can enter "substantive" talks on September 15th.
So, almost three years after the first IRA ceasefire, politics in Northern Ireland is due to inch further towards the elusive goal of all-embracing talks.
But "substantive" talks may not be inclusive talks. This was evident from the high degree of political atheism in unionist quarters about the remit and muscle of the proposed Independent International Commission on Decommissioning, agreed by the British and Irish governments on Tuesday.
The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) was the most disbelieving. Party secretary Mr Nigel Dodds dubbed the new commission a "toothless wonder". His colleague Mr Ian Paisley Jnr said it was a "fraud" and a "deception".
But everyone knew that the two governments could not satisfy the DUP and Mr Robert McCartney's UK Unionist Party. So, the big question remains, what will David do next?
Mr Trimble was none too pleased with the scope of the new body on decommissioning. The Ulster Unionist Party leader scornfully wondered how the two governments expected movement to substantive talks when the proposed new body did not even have a chairperson appointed, and did not have a clearly defined position on decommissioning. "Without progress on this issue talks cannot progress," he asserted.
The two governments pledged that the new disarmament body will be fully operational by September 15th. However, unionist criticism of the body carries some weight. The agreement establishing the commission deals with "facilitating" decommissioning, and "consulting" with the political parties on disarmament schemes.
But, as unionists have complained, not only is there no chairperson for the body but so far the details of how decommissioning might take place and how it might be verified are amorphous, to say the least.
The two governments have just over two weeks to beef up the detail, but as Dr Mowlam and Mr Burke tacitly admitted on Tuesday, they are travelling more in hope than in expectation of IRA or loyalist paramilitary disarmament.
The IRA, UDA, UVF, and Red Hand Commando have insisted that when there is a settlement there then may be decommissioning. But not until then, because the alternative is a serious split in these organisations - which carries the attendant threat of a return to widespread violence.
Dr Mowlam and Mr Burke indicated that their priority was to keep the paramilitaries on board Mr Tony Blair's peace settlement train - and thereafter to try to inveigle the UUP into the talks.
Indeed, when asked if the British government was not effectively admitting there would be no decommissioning during talks, Dr Mowlam conceded she saw no alternative to the current policy. "What we have now is a possible structure to move the situation forward. That is the best we've got," she said.
She and Mr Burke spoke of a "dynamic" developing towards disarmament if the unionist parties, and particularly Mr Trimble, engaged in inclusive talks. An all-party process would "in its own way encourage people to use the mechanism we are establishing", said Mr Burke.
ALL pretty loose and ill-defined. But as Mr Burke effectively observed, just as there is no final proof that God does or does not exist, equally there can be no absolute guarantee that decommissioning will or will not take place.
Which brings us back to the difficult question, will David Trimble shed his doubts? Odds are at the moment that he will move to a position of political agnosticism, with potential for eventually making that great "leap of faith" - at some stage.
A confidant of the UUP leader said that if the two governments managed to appoint a chairperson and clearly defined the remit of the decommissioning body, Mr Trimble's position within the party would be strengthened. Just as the IRA and the loyalist parties have their own dissidents and mavericks, the UUP has plenty of members ready, willing and able to stir up trouble for Mr Trimble.
"For some time now the British government has been bending over backwards to soften up Sinn Fein and the IRA. It's now time that they started trying to soften us up," said the UUP source.
The confirmation of Canadian Gen John de Chastelain as chairman of the disarmament commission would help to settle some UUP concerns. His military and Commonwealth background could reassure unionists that decommissioning will not be addressed in an indifferent or cavalier fashion by the two governments.
Gen de Chastelain's appointment would probably mean the re-juggling of some of the current chair positions which are shared between Mr George Mitchell, Mr Harri Holkeri and Gen de Chastelain. This might entail replacing the Canadian general with former US senator Mr Mitchell as chairman of the sensitive North-South Strand Two element of the talks, in order to ease the general's workload.
This would certainly please the SDLP and the Irish Government, although here again the UUP could raise objections. It also appears likely that the Finnish, US and Canadian governments will be asked to provide additional personnel to chair various strands and elements of the talks.
In recent weeks Mr Trimble has been providing political cover for himself and his party through the UUP's consultative process with church, business and community groups and individuals. Certainly the main Protestant churches and business people have been urging the party to stay in the talks and engage with Sinn Fein.
The argument has been that unionists have nothing to fear from challenging the republican thesis, and that it would be in the interests of the wider public for Mr Trimble to confront Sinn Fein. It would mean that unionists would be "shaping their own future". These are strong arguments which Mr Trimble could usefully cite as a defence against DUP and UK Unionist attacks if he does remain at the talks.
And it was particularly significant that Mr Trimble's own Upper Bann constituency association voted unanimously on Tuesday night in support of the UUP remaining at the talks. Mr Mark Neill, a member of the association, encapsulated the argument that may well wash best with unionists when he said that the UUP "is going to once again have to stand up for Northern Ireland and put the case forward for it".
Mr Trimble is keeping his own counsel on what he will do next. He appears to be quite sanguine about maintaining distance from the Rev Ian Paisley and Mr Robert McCartney. With some "softening up of unionists" by the British government Mr Trimble may well decide to take a historic gamble.
It seems likely that initially, at least, his first contact with Sinn Fein will be on a "proximity basis". This will greatly annoy Sinn Fein, and to a lesser extent the SDLP and Irish Government, but in the early stages Mr Trimble will test the waters, treading warily, conscious of the enemies in front of him and at his back.
It also seems likely that if the UUP is not satisfied with the decommissioning body that there may be considerable unionist posturing and manoeuvring on September 15th, possibly with the tactical intention of putting back the actual start of substantive talks.
Ultimately though, Mr Trimble may take that great "leap of faith". But it's likely to be a gradual rather than a road to Damascus conversion. Not a perfect opening scenario for September 15th, but better than no talks at all.
