The Irish Government has a vital role in addressing Sinn Féin’s latest Stormont drama – a role it seems determined to mishandle or ignore.Last week, Sinn Féin dropped heavy hints it might walk out of the Northern Executive due to alleged DUP obstruction.This sudden switch from positivity to gloom made quite an impact, although not the one the party intended. Threatening a crisis amid the success of the fleadh jarred badly with the public mood. It escaped nobody’s notice that the hints followed another poor opinion poll result for Sinn Féin, the latest in four years of steady decline. Trying to blame the DUP for its falling support was widely greeted with derision. Although the unionist party is actively blocking several key Sinn Féin policies, most clearly a Bill for workers’ rights, it has legitimate reasons for doing so and has offered a compromise deal. The downgrade of the Casement Park GAA stadium in Belfast has been pinned on a DUP sports minister, but anyone familiar with this story knows the truth is far more complicated.Most of Sinn Féin’s other failures are transparently self-inflicted. It cannot build the A5 dual-carriageway because it will not adjust climate change targets – something every unionist party has offered to support. It cannot expand university places in Derry because it will not raise student tuition fees. It cannot deliver a budget because its only answer to funding shortfalls is more money from London. Again, every unionist on the Executive has decided to agree with Sinn Féin on this point – or, more correctly, to hide behind it.After a week of criticism, including from other nationalists and Alliance, Sinn Féin retreated on Tuesday when its finance minister, John O’Dowd, said his party has “no intent, plan or otherwise” to walk out of the Executive.But doubts remain, not least because O’Dowd has previously differed with Sinn Féin’s leadership and direction. Stormont appears significantly more fragile as it staggers towards next May’s election.[ Westminster being ‘unfair’ to NI over public services budget, Minister saysOpens in new window ]Collapse is a temptation to republicans because its main downside from their perspective – handing power to British ministers – has been neutralised by Dublin.During Sinn Féin’s last walk-out in 2017, Simon Coveney, then minister for foreign affairs, declared “there can be no British-only direct rule”. British governments have since decided this means Northern Ireland must be left in limbo when devolution falls.Some of Sinn Féin’s members and supporters believe it ultimately means collapse heralds joint authority, a Border poll and a united Ireland. This can put severe grass-roots pressure on the party to walk out whenever things are not going its way.Coveney was not calling for joint authority in 2017, or demanding Northern Ireland be left in limbo. His argument was that the Belfast Agreement requires London and Dublin to work together to fix problems with devolution. This has never been clarified, however, turning it into a menace to devolution.Striking a better balance is difficult. If the alternative to Stormont is too clearly “British-only” direct rule, it tempts the DUP to walk out – a temptation it could give in to at least as readily as Sinn Féin, given its own falling popularity.The difficulty of the task does not excuse ignoring it. There is no sign of any Irish Government or party of Government recalibrating their message on Stormont collapses to create less of a hostage to fortune.[ Belfast’s fleadh found space for Britishness in a celebration of IrishnessOpens in new window ]Sinn Féin’s wobbling has renewed demands for reform of powersharing, so that walk-outs no longer cause a collapse.Reform can appear hopeless, as in practice it requires the two largest parties to agree to it. Both fear being excluded and have demonstrated laughable cynicism. The DUP supported reform until it ceased to be the largest party; Sinn Féin opposed reform until this year – a stance it may only be taking knowing the DUP would block it.The Belfast Agreement stipulates a constant process of reform, overseen by London and Dublin. Change has more often emerged from crisis talks chaired by both governments. In either scenario, both essentially see their contribution as that of neutral arbiters. Both could be more assertive, the Irish Government especially, as the agreement allows it more leeway than the sovereign government in Northern Ireland.In 2024, just after the end of a two-year walk-out by the DUP, then taoiseach Leo Varadkar and tánaiste Micheál Martin separately said they would like to see Stormont’s large party veto abolished, albeit through cross-community consensus. This annoyed the DUP, which said the time was not right.Annoying Sinn Féin when it threatens devolution would be a helpful contribution from Dublin. The party’s cynicism could be criticised, its failures highlighted and – perhaps most cruelly of all – it could be threatened with the reforms it may only be pretending to want.