ABSTRACT
The Narmada movement differs from the militant Naxalite movements or elements of the secessionist movements in Punjab and Kashmir or the insurgencies in the Northeast, in that its politics of resistance is self-consciously nonviolent. As the movement against the Sardar Sarovar Project in the Narmada valley enters its most crucial phase, it continues to face the widespread use of undemocratic tactics by central and state governments. Like many other contemporary social and political movements, the Narmada movement is part of an important history of resistance. What probably explains the relative apathy among large sections of intellectual community and other concerned people is the challenge that the Narmada Bachao Andolan and its supporters pose to the dominant model of economic development. It is somewhat paradoxical that the national press and a significant cross-section of the regional press have consistently been favorable to the Narmada movement and have, on numerous occasions, exposed the repressive and apathetic nature of the official response.
