The contributions in this book indicate not just interpretations about the relationship between text and context, the significance of key principles, or the dynamic that exists between the generalities and specificities of negotiation and dialogue, but, more importantly, pragmatism. That is, where approaches to policy and principle are based on the practical consequences of twists and turns which invariably emerge with changing conditions and circumstances rather than because of adherence to some fixed or absolute concept. The peace process was to a large extent built on the nuances of ambiguity, yet the logic and application of pragmatism played a bigger role. Through pragmatism key principles were perceived more in relative terms, where conceding to the truth of principle was far less important than conceding to its value. The pragmatic approach can also be observed throughout this book, where principles were reviewed and revisited as part of a shifting process that required meanings to be adjusted and adapted accordingly. Obviously, the realities of engagement framed expectations about principles and core positions, but it is apparent that, important though this was, commitment to the process was more significant. As with the decommissioning issue, although recognition of its importance was integral for demonstrating an exclusively peaceful approach to political engagement, it is also apparent that judgements about when and how this should be done changed, and that this change was a result of the governments responding to contestations about the form and impact of delivery. Managing those contestations was more vital than merely seeking to impose such principles as demands. And, even though that may have been the initial position, it soon became clear that such rigidity would make decommissioning less rather than more likely.