The title of this piece is a paraphrase of what Herbert George Wells said: “We have to end the war, or the war will end us”. This is today’s (Thursday) quotation in the freedictionary.com. The appeal so amply applies to the situation back home in Manipur.

This Juncture: I understand that the SPF Government in the State is blowing its own trumpet now for its completion of a full term of five years at the helm of affairs in the State. It is now time for all of us to do a stock-taking of the last five years and apply our mind for the next round of elections. The method I am going to employ to do my bit in this direction is historical appropriation as against instantaneous euphoria. An example might make this clear. The people of Manipur cannot forget Rishang Keising in so far as the recent boost to the sports movement in the State is concerned. He is the one who brought the National Games to the State even though the games were not held during his Chief Ministership. History always gives the right credit to the right persons. I would base my assessment of the present SPF ministry on two aspects – identity and governance.

Before I proceed: Before I proceed let me mention an area in which I would award full marks to the Government without any reservation. One area in which history would be unequivocally generous to the Ibobi-led Government is the widening of the Singjamei segment of NH-39. This has quite long been considered to be an impossible task. This has shown that if a leadership has wills, performance follows. As regards the handing over of the Kangla and the conversion of Manipur University into a Central University, I would rather consider these as the culmination of historical factors and the instant events rather than any effort by the Government and its leadership. With this, let me now turn to the two aspects I would like to look into.

Identity: Every individual craves for an identity. In fact, the hallmark of any development process is the multiplication of individual identities in a context of diversifying social groups rather than getting stuck into an identity of social categories. An individual’s identity in a social group is something she has earned by her endeavours while the one in a social category is something given from outside. Any government worth the salt would enhance the scope for diversification of social group identities for that is how a society moves forward.

Now, what is the score of the SPF Government in this front? The greatest trademark of the period of this ministry is the stunting of emergence and growth of secular social groups. On the contrary, the mobilisation of people along social categories got absolutely sharpened during this period. In other words, racialisation (ethnicisation) of identity has been the marked characteristic of this period. A recent twist to this racialisation of identity is the violent character it has been allowed to acquire. Violence is not only firing a gun or stabbing someone; it can even be reflected in the manner of functioning. The languages and actions the various social categories have been allowed to resort to are just frightening – unrestrained verbose, destroying and burning properties are all violence with dangerous portents. Even the very functioning of the government has been violent: the shunting out of people in the ongoing so-called public hearings (is it a court?) for the Tipaimukh dam is also an example of violence.

Governance: The above fear immediately takes me to the question as to whether the last five years of the SPF Government has been only government or has it been accompanied by governance as well. I am afraid it has been only government without any semblance of governance. A government administering governance would be proactive, time consistent and guide public mobilisation along positive lines. No other government in recent memory has been marked by so high a public perception of corruption and corruptibility. The only proactive element I can think of is the, as mentioned earlier, widening of the Singjamei section of NH39. Even when the government has reacted it has only been by way of encouraging violence. In this process it has proved itself as the most time inconsistent government. Let me give two recent examples (these are very neutral examples in the sense that I am away from the scene when all these happened). First, the reinstatement of the college lecturers after three colleges suffered burnt injuries. To begin with the very manner of removal smacked of lack of imagination. Secondly, the suspension of police personnel after a public outcry marked by violence. General strike and government inaction itself are also examples of violence. If the government were going to work upon something why wait for the violence of public protests and general strike, accompanied by another violence of government inaction or delayed action.

When it comes to violence and governance two other examples keep recurring in my mind. The ill-fated Lungnila Elizabeth incident generated a spontaneous, what I had called the Lungnila Effect, atmosphere marked by goodwill and mutual sharing of pain among the various social categories in the State. The government, instead of capitalising on this effect, just let it go evaporated. This is one extreme example of violence and non-governance by the present regime. Another more recent example is the mass movement consequent upon the killing of Manorama. The kind of that spontaneous force would have been the most potent weapon for change in the hands of any real leader and a governing government. But the non-governance of the SPF let it go by once again.

My Final Assessment: Well different people would be doing their own assessments. For me, the SPF government would be remembered for three things: (a) the widening of the Singjamei segment of NH 39; (b) racialisation of identity in the State; and (c) absence of governance despite five years of reigning the government.