Analysis:Gerry Adams is on the high wire without a safety net, writes Gerry Moriarty, Northern Editor
Between now and Sunday week Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams is going to haul republicans through a brutal exercise in soul-searching and hope to bring them out the other side still standing, still broadly united - and supporting the PSNI.
Mr Adams and Sinn Féin MEP Bairbre de Brúare about to embark on a series of public meetings telling republicans that the threshold for accepting the PSNI as a legitimate police force has now been reached.
On Sunday week Mr Adams will also argue before up to 2,000 Sinn Féin ardfheis delegates in Dublin that the dye is cast, that there is no going back on the required St Andrews commitment to policing. The atmosphere should be electric.
Odds remain that he will carry the meeting, but he must do so by a convincing margin - probably by two-thirds and more.
And, needs must, he is performing this high wire act without the aid of a safety net. There are some honeyed DUP words for sure but no guarantees that Ian Paisley will share power with Martin McGuinness on March 26th, or accept the devolution of policing powers by May 2008, as envisaged by the St Andrews Agreement.
If you read Mr Adams's statement after Saturday's ardchomhairle meeting you may detect an undercurrent of conditionality to the Sinn Féin decision to call the ardfheis.
The relevant paragraph says: "The ardchomhairle is proposing that an extraordinary ardheis adopts this motion and gives the ardchomhairle the responsibility and authority to fully implement all elements of it. The necessary context for this is the re-establishment of the political institutions and confirmation that policing and justice powers will be transferred to these institutions or when acceptable new partnership arrangements to implement the Good Friday agreement are in place."
Translated, that means that it will be for the ardchomhairle to decide how and when to implement an ardfheis decision backing the police. There are two strands to the "necessary context" for this to happen, as mentioned by Mr Adams.
The first is the DUP accepting the March 26th and May 2008 requirements. But this won't happen, the DUP insists, unless there is evidence of "on the ground" Sinn Féin support for the police.
Mr Adams knows this, and if you read the rest of his statement where he says "it would be entirely wrong to allow the most negative elements of unionism a veto over republican and nationalist efforts to achieve the new beginning to policing", he appears to be acknowledging that right from the off there must be proof of Sinn Féin endorsement of the PSNI.
A Sinn Féin source appeared to confirm this when he said what Mr Adams did on Saturday was a "unilateral" act. However, it is clear that any procrastination after the ardfheis in terms of supporting the police would cause problems.
But again, the second strand of the "necessary context" for allowing support for the police refers to the alternative - if the DUP won't share power by March 26th - of new British-Irish "partnership arrangements". This is Plan B, where it would be a continuation of direct rule but with the strengthened involvement of Dublin.
And it is reasonable to assess that for Sinn Féin - having done the historic deed on policing - Plan B would be to its liking. Some in the DUP have also made that assessment and understand why there is a mutuality of approach to this project, and why if they don't reciprocate, it could be unionism, not republicanism, that will suffer in the long run.
The DUP hardliners think differently, however, and they could still wreck this project, especially if there is any Sinn Féin equivocation.