Opinion - Warren Little - Panorama exposed the mutual deadlock on The Past

A museum is exactly where the British political and security establishment would like to consign the Troubles and everything about it. For their part republicans found it fitting that the museum in question was the Imperial War Museum, since it affirms their preferred narrative of an imperialist force waging war in cahoots with a local militia.

The strategies of both sides, though for differing reasons, were thus catered for by the gun in the museum. A one-all draw. Neither side is prioritising victims. “I am absolutely shocked” said Billy McManus, whose father was murdered. “It should be here in a secure place so it can be used for ballistics… What does it say about their treatment of the case?” Everyone knows why The Past is important: unresolved, it is a boil un-lanced, and it is poisoning our present and infecting our future. Yet still we have not dealt with it.

The continuing deadlock on The Past can be explained by a field of study called game theory. As fate would have it, the person most famous for that theory died the week before Panorama was broadcast. John Nash, who had nothing whatsoever to do with the Troubles, was an American mathematician and the real-life subject of the film A Beautiful Mind. He worked out what happens when people compete by anticipating the response of their opponents. He reasoned that even where an outcome that is more beneficial for both parties is possible, a ‘game’ results in a position where no ‘player’ can gain by changing his strategy. A state of Nash Equilibrium is reached: sub-optimal deadlock.

Resolution of The Past is only possible with full disclosure of the truth by cooperation between the various sides. But if Panorama is only half right, the truth is ugly. Nonetheless, for both Sinn Fein and the Government (the main but not only protagonists) there are identifiable benefits in the truth being revealed. For republicans it offers the prospect of proving to the world that their allegations of the British security services’ malign role were right all along, and that justice has hitherto been one-sided. For the Government, it would mean that so much of the distrust that weighs down on Northern Ireland’s prosperity is substantially lifted, and it is no longer an expensive headache.

Yet the two sides hold firm to their existing ‘strategies’ in Nash terms. The Government’s current strategy is to keep hidden the sensitive documents that might reveal its share of the truth. It does so largely because Sinn Fein’s current strategy, in turn, is to keep hidden its share of the truth. If either side were to take the initiative and unilaterally reveal sensitive documents or testimonies, in the absence of an amnesty, they would expose wholesale their own subscribers to arrest and imprisonment, an event of such unbalanced resonance that the old fault lines of conflict would open up once more. A state of Nash Equilibrium therefore abides, with all the sub-optimal effects that it produces in the form of political and societal friction but also relative stability. A one-all draw.

There is no point pretending that the Nash equilibria at play are confined to the Government and Sinn Fein. There is a wider rationale to each of them keeping the truth hidden and it is a pure reflection of what is in the minds of the people of Northern Ireland. Most ‘ordinary’ republicans and other nationalists would rebel at the idea of IRA members telling their share of the truth and more of them going to jail as a consequence, while the British security services keep quiet and their guilty parties remain scot free. The same is true for the strategy of ‘ordinary’ unionists, vice versa. Unionists also fear that if the Government revealed its share of the truth and republicans said thank you very much and kept their share hidden, the history of the Troubles would be written solely in Sinn Fein’s preferred typeface. Whether fully conscious or not, this strategy is behind the unionist approach of opposing nationalist calls for inquiries and refusing to demand full Government disclosure even though some unionists themselves may have been the victims of state agents. The truth, for each side, is a valuable commodity without a market.

The overall result is the sub-optimal predicament: the majority of victims continue to go without either truth or justice and The Past remains a game. We frequently hear the call that the interests of victims must come first. It is time to face the reality that most so-called ‘ordinary’ people in Northern Ireland, even some victims groups, do not believe in unconditional truth and justice, and the conditions they attach to it make it unobtainable for anyone.

As for Billy McManus, Panorama gave him a hint of the truth and he is, unarguably, already owed justice. But most people do not perceive him simply as a victim; rather a victim belonging to one side. Thus the truth and justice he is already owed is withheld, because we perceive it as a commodity yet to be traded with the other side. In short, we expect it to be paid for by the truth and justice owed to some other poor soul. And the Nash Equilibrium ensures that will not happen.

There was a microcosmic quality to Panorama’s revelation last week that an assault rifle used in the unsolved murders of five people, including a 15 year-old boy, was found in a display cabinet in a London museum.

A museum is exactly where the British political and security establishment would like to consign the Troubles and everything about it. For their part republicans found it fitting that the museum in question was the Imperial War Museum, since it affirms their preferred narrative of an imperialist force waging war in cahoots with a local militia.

The strategies of both sides, though for differing reasons, were thus catered for by the gun in the museum. A one-all draw. Neither side is prioritising victims. “I am absolutely shocked” said Billy McManus, whose father was murdered. “It should be here in a secure place so it can be used for ballistics… What does it say about their treatment of the case?” Everyone knows why The Past is important: unresolved, it is a boil un-lanced, and it is poisoning our present and infecting our future. Yet still we have not dealt with it.

The continuing deadlock on The Past can be explained by a field of study called game theory. As fate would have it, the person most famous for that theory died the week before Panorama was broadcast. John Nash, who had nothing whatsoever to do with the Troubles, was an American mathematician and the real-life subject of the film A Beautiful Mind. He worked out what happens when people compete by anticipating the response of their opponents. He reasoned that even where an outcome that is more beneficial for both parties is possible, a ‘game’ results in a position where no ‘player’ can gain by changing his strategy. A state of Nash Equilibrium is reached: sub-optimal deadlock.

Resolution of The Past is only possible with full disclosure of the truth by cooperation between the various sides. But if Panorama is only half right, the truth is ugly. Nonetheless, for both Sinn Fein and the Government (the main but not only protagonists) there are identifiable benefits in the truth being revealed. For republicans it offers the prospect of proving to the world that their allegations of the British security services’ malign role were right all along, and that justice has hitherto been one-sided. For the Government, it would mean that so much of the distrust that weighs down on Northern Ireland’s prosperity is substantially lifted, and it is no longer an expensive headache.

Yet the two sides hold firm to their existing ‘strategies’ in Nash terms. The Government’s current strategy is to keep hidden the sensitive documents that might reveal its share of the truth. It does so largely because Sinn Fein’s current strategy, in turn, is to keep hidden its share of the truth. If either side were to take the initiative and unilaterally reveal sensitive documents or testimonies, in the absence of an amnesty, they would expose wholesale their own subscribers to arrest and imprisonment, an event of such unbalanced resonance that the old fault lines of conflict would open up once more. A state of Nash Equilibrium therefore abides, with all the sub-optimal effects that it produces in the form of political and societal friction but also relative stability. A one-all draw.

There is no point pretending that the Nash equilibria at play are confined to the Government and Sinn Fein. There is a wider rationale to each of them keeping the truth hidden and it is a pure reflection of what is in the minds of the people of Northern Ireland. Most ‘ordinary’ republicans and other nationalists would rebel at the idea of IRA members telling their share of the truth and more of them going to jail as a consequence, while the British security services keep quiet and their guilty parties remain scot free. The same is true for the strategy of ‘ordinary’ unionists, vice versa. Unionists also fear that if the Government revealed its share of the truth and republicans said thank you very much and kept their share hidden, the history of the Troubles would be written solely in Sinn Fein’s preferred typeface. Whether fully conscious or not, this strategy is behind the unionist approach of opposing nationalist calls for inquiries and refusing to demand full Government disclosure even though some unionists themselves may have been the victims of state agents. The truth, for each side, is a valuable commodity without a market.

The overall result is the sub-optimal predicament: the majority of victims continue to go without either truth or justice and The Past remains a game. We frequently hear the call that the interests of victims must come first. It is time to face the reality that most so-called ‘ordinary’ people in Northern Ireland, even some victims groups, do not believe in unconditional truth and justice, and the conditions they attach to it make it unobtainable for anyone.

As for Billy McManus, Panorama gave him a hint of the truth and he is, unarguably, already owed justice. But most people do not perceive him simply as a victim; rather a victim belonging to one side. Thus the truth and justice he is already owed is withheld, because we perceive it as a commodity yet to be traded with the other side. In short, we expect it to be paid for by the truth and justice owed to some other poor soul. And the Nash Equilibrium ensures that will not happen.