Excerpts:

Q: TheAIADMK charges that the Prime Minister brought about the Cauvery accord merely to help you as a result of a secret deal between the BJP and the DMK. What is your reaction to this?

A: This is completely wrong. The Kerala Chief Minister belongs to the CPM and the Karnataka Chief Minister to the Janata Dal, while the DMK had two Chief Ministers, R V Janakiraman of Pondicherry and I, all of whom belong to parties different from the BJP.

The meeting on the Cauvery issue cannot be viewed from a political angle. AIADMK general secretary J Jayalalitha is unhappy that we succeeded where she failed. During AIADMK rule, they enacted a drama of protest and fast. The then Union minister V C Shukla came here and assured the setting up of a regulation committee on the Cauvery issue. When Shukla wrote letters to the concerned chief ministers seeking their consent, Pondicherry CM V Vaithilingam sent a reply immediately. But Jayalalitha did not reply for nine months. Even when she prepared the reply accepting thecommittee, she did not send it to the Centre for another month.

While there had been arguments and agitations for seven years, a good decision has finally been arrived at by four chief ministers in the presence of the PM and farmers have welcomed it. Jayalalitha is opposing it for political reasons.

Q: Jayalalitha, who in her campaign before the Lok Sabha elections, had described Sonia Gandhi as a foreigner who should not rule the country, is now trying to establish ties with her and the Congress. How do you view this development?

A: It is for Sonia Gandhi to react and not for me to say.

Q: In the last LS elections, your alliance fared badly. Do you propose to include parties excluded the last time in the next elections?

A: Yes. We realise it was wrong to have not included parties like the CPM and Janata Dal. We propose to include parties in the alliance for the next elections, at least at the Tamil Nadu level, as I am not sure what will happen at the national level.

Q: Will thisbe finalised at the DMK's Tirunelveli conference?

A: Not necessarily. It could be taken up separately.

Q: How are your party's ties with the TMC? Is the alliance strong?

A: Our ties are very good. Though there are some persons at the lower levels who issue statements and there are some press reports, there is no difference of opinion between me and TMC chief G K Moopanar. The alliance will continue.

Q: Is the TMC likely to support a Congress-led Government at the Centre? Will it affect ties with your party?

A: Moopanar has not said anything categorical. He has only said it could be considered but has not taken any such decision.

Q: What about the MDMK? Is there a prospect of a merger with the DMK?

A: I don't wish to say anything on the subject as MDMK leader Vaiko could then issue statements that I am trying to create mischief or it would affect his ties with other parties. There is no indication of a merger.

Q: Why do you think Vaiko is against your Government'sdismissal?

A: Like the DMK, Vaiko is also opposed to the use of Article 356.

Q: Even if there are no feelers about a merger, do you think there is a prospect of unity on public issues or issues for the Dravidian movement?

A: There would be nothing wrong in uniting on public issues, on the common cause of the Dravidian movement.

Q: How do you compare the coalition Governments of the UF and the BJP?

A: The UF had some problems, but not like this. There used to be only the odd misunderstanding. But in the BJP-led coalition, every day is a life and death battle for the coalition -- right from the time of sending letters of support to the President.

Q: In your 75-year-long career, there must have been many political incidents. Looking back, do you now feel some incidents could have been avoided?

A: Yes, in the case of the expulsion of the late M G Ramachandran from the DMK. Even when we were talking it over, the then DMK general secretary V R Nedunchezhiyan (now AIADMKpresidium chairman), rushed to the press and announced that MGR had been expelled from the party. When some others and I tried to get the press back to the Chepauk Guest House where the discussions were on, it was too late. All of us knew we tried to stop it, MGR too knew it. That was an incident which could have been averted.

Q: Can you recall another incident in which you now wish a different decision had been taken and an adverse situation averted?

A: No, except that I wish we had included some parties like the CPM in the alliance for the 1998 Lok Sabha elections. That was a mistake, we admit now.

Q: Is the Multi-Disciplinary Monitoring Agency (MDMA) likely to question you soon on the Rajiv Gandhi assassination? Will you co-operate with it?

A: My name was deleted from the list of suspects in the ATR of the Centre, but only after Maran wrote a letter to Home Minister Advani. We have never claimed that my name had been removed from the ATR itself. But the weight of the ATR as regardsreferences to me has greatly come down.

I don't see why the MDMA should question me, overruling my objection. However, if they do come, I will explain to them the evidence given by me before the Jain Commission, and ask that they question others as well.

Q: Can you describe briefly your association with ten prime ministers, beginning with Indira Gandhi?

A: INDIRA GANDHI: Her impression of me was that I was very firm, whether as a political friend or foe. She was very affectionate towards me and my family. During my visits to Delhi, whenever she came to know that my family members were with me, she would invite all of us (over the telephone or through a letter) to her house for dinner. Her second son, Sanjay Gandhi (I didn't know Rajiv Gandhi well then as he was not in politics), used to come regularly to Maran's house in Delhi where I stayed, for discussions. He was an affectionate friend. It was well known that I had occasional differences of opinion with Indira Gandhi, sometimesconfrontations, too.

MORARJI DESAI: He was a strict and straightforward man. He was not troubled by alliance leaders but by men from among his own ministers and lost power. In 1973, when I was CM, I spoke at a Backward Class conference in Allahabad at the invitation of Raj Narain. I then sought a commission to be set up by the Centre to provide reservation for Backward Classes at the Centre. It was announced in Morarji Desai's rule and the recommendations were implemented 12 years later by V P Singh when he was PM.

CHARAN SINGH AND CHANDRA SHEKHAR: They were not in office for long and therefore I cannot narrate how they performed as PMs. Charan Singh espoused the cause of farmers in a big way. Chandra Shekhar, though he was in power for a short period, got my Government dismissed, but otherwise I had no other difference of opinion with him.

RAJIV GANDHI: He treated me with affection. Though he launched a strong campaign against me in the 1989 elections, soon afterwards, I tookcharge as CM and went to Delhi. I intended only to make a courtesy call on him but he was kind and asked me to stay back in Delhi for two or three days and try to find a solution to the Sri Lankan Tamil problem. He asked the minister and officials concerned to discuss things with me. It is another matter that for different reasons, things didn't work out.

When I expressed regret for Vaiko's clandestine visit to Sri Lanka to meet Prabhakaran, Rajiv showed he had a large heart and said he would not make it a big issue and expressed concern that Vaiko should come back safely. Later, at Jayalalitha's instigation, at Chandra Shekhar's instance, my Government was sought to be dismissed and R Venkataraman as President in an undemocratic manner signed the order. I thought that was politics, a situation compelled by circumstance and was not sore with Rajiv.

V P SINGH: He was like my brother. We never moved as PM and CM or leader of the front and an ally. We treated each other as friends all the time. On theCauvery issue, when I sought his help to set up a tribunal, he was very helpful. During his period, he accomplished a lot of things for Tamil Nadu. At a public meeting in Chennai, I made a demand that the airport terminals in Chennai be named after Anna and Kamaraj. He made an on-the-spot announcement which made all of us happy.

P V NARASIMHA RAO: Even earlier when he was External Affairs minister and before that in Indira Gandhi's cabinet, he was a close friend. After I took charge as CM in Tamil Nadu and he was stepping down as Prime Minister, I requested him to spare the services of then Defence Secretary K A Nambiar as Tamil Nadu chief secretary. He readily acqueised and made immediate arrangements after obtaining Nambiar's consent. He always treated me with a lot of respect.

H D DEVE GOWDA: Though he was not PM for long, he was a good friend. The only problem with him was that he sometimes forgot he was Prime Minister of the country and thought he was PM for Karnataka alone. However, hewas a very dignified man.

I K GUJRAL: A man of great dignity. He was a well-informed man. A man who showed gratitude. He had great affection for me. He was well aware of the Sri Lanka problem and wanted a smooth solution; however, his term ended soon.

A B VAJPAYEE: I knew him well, right from the days of the Emergency. I attended a meeting in Delhi at Era Sezhiyan's house along with Vajpayee on the problems caused by the Emergency. Later, he came to Madurai at my invitation to attend a meeting of the Tamil Eelam Supporters Organisation (TESO). We are very good friends and had a good personal relationship right through, based on political culture and dignity. Vajpayee and Advani are very good men. I like them but not their party. This I have said earlier, too. Friendship is different, politics is different. We remain good friends.