Did Jayalalithaa trade Kudankulam for UN vote on SL?

Sandwiched between one demonstration demanding special status for Bihar, and another by lawyers demanding reservation, is a quiet stretch in New Delhi’s designated protest street, Jantar Mantar. And it is occupied by social activist Sandeep Pandey. Donning a white spotless kurta, Pandey is on Day Two of his seven-day fast in support of the protest movement against the nuclear plant in Kudankulam. 
Tuesday morning saw Swami Agnivesh and political scientist Achin Vinayak arrive to lend their support and sign a letter addressed to the Prime Minister demanding an immediate stop to the repression of the protest movement and demanding the cancellation of the project.

 Yet there are no microphones, no swelling crowds, and no speeches. Firstpost visited Pandey to ask him a few questions on his protest and his fears for the future of the Kudankulam plant. Excerpts from the interview. 

Why this fast in Delhi now? [caption id=“attachment_257436” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Sandeep Pandey said that Kudankulam was more the Prime Minister’s issue than Jayalalithaa’s: Naresh Sharma/Firstpost”] [/caption] We had planned a march on Monday from Nagercoil to Idinthakarai. But because Section 144 has been imposed in the entire area, any activist arriving from outside is being arrested. So it became clear that the march would not be possible and so our friends suggested we don’t go there now. Since such a big agitation is going on – involving 10,000 people - we thought we must do something here in New Delhi. This is mainly because this decision of pushing through the project is more Manmohan Singh’s than Jayalalithaa’s. We feel that there has been some kind of agreement of the Indian government censuring Sri Lanka on human rights violations and Jayalalithaa agreeing to support Manmohan Singh on the nuclear issue. Initially, she had supported the struggle. 
So we are targeting the signature campaign at the Prime Minister. This movement has been very peaceful till now. The large presence of policemen – we’ve been told the numbers are between 5000-7000 - has created a tense environment. This can provoke violence if the police try to reach those who are  fasting. Do you think the offer of talks by SP Udayakumar of the People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy who is leading the campaign from Idinthakarai will elicit a response from the government? A solution can emerge only from talks. They have already had two rounds of negotiations with the chief minister. Till the time that the government was talking there was no police. Now that they have sent the police, it shows that they want to ride roughshod over public opinion. So unless the government is willing to withdraw police, a conducive atmosphere cannot be created for talks. The government has to first win the confidence of people and then a solution should be found. What do you make of the government’s accusation that protests are foreign funded? Till now, the government has not provided any details of the organisations that have allegedly diverted funds.They should come out and tell the people - which organisations, how much money and from which sources money is being diverted. 
The argument of maoists being involved is equally baseless. If Udayakumar is a naxal, then why did Jayalalithaa meet him? This is a standard tactic of suppressing people’s voice. Binayak Sen is the most prominent example of this tactic. This allegation was made against Akil Gogoi who is leading an anti-dam movement in Assam, it has been made against Seema Azad in Uttar Pradesh who is now in jail, it was made against Prashanth Rahi from Utarakhand who was jailed and now released, in Gujarat several activists have been arrested on these charges. When the government is uncomfortable with an activist, they have has used these tactics to either suppress or arrest them. What led to the anti-nuclear protest in Koodankulam becoming such a mass struggle? Initially, like everywhere else, people believed this plant would bring them development and jobs. When I was there three-four years ago, it was very difficult to convince people of the hazards of this plant. After the Fukushima accident last year, there was more awareness and there were demands that people be assured of their safety. As a result, a mock drill was conducted during which people were told to run as far as they could from the plant. That rang the alarm bells. The first protest after the mock drill attracted 18,000 people. People are now convinced that the plant is not in their interest. Given the kind of force that is being mobilized, are you apprehensive about how this is going to end? We are afraid. Especially, because the stakes are high. First of all, there is the nuclear industry. And the Prime Minister has made it a prestige issue like he did earlier with the Indo-US nuclear deal. Otherwise perceived to be a weak PM who doesn’t take a stand, on the nuclear issue, he has gone as far as saying that he will stake his position as PM. 
So we fear that there might be repression. And the fallout of that won’t be good. 

ends