Opinion A nuclear interaction

My second major interaction with Sethna was when he proposed the appointment of Dr Fareeduddin as director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). Because of the personal differences that developed between Sethna and Raja Ramanna after the Pokharan test,the latter (who was director,BARC) came away from the DAE and was appointed scientific advisor to the defence minister. Sethna wanted to fill up the vacancy. When the matter was considered by the cabinet’s appointments committee,V. Shankar,the secretary to the PM,expressed his reservations and suggested that the department be reorganised. Prime Minister Morarji Desai then directed that the matter be examined by a committee chaired by Dr Atma Ram,then director-general of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and a close personal friend of the PM,the cabinet secretary and the AEC chairman. Since they were busy,the matter was remitted to be considered and reported by a representative each of the cabinet secretary and the AEC chairman. The cabinet secretary nominated me and Dr Sethna suggested Subramanyam Siva,who had long been secretary to Dr Bhabha and himself. When the report was to be finalised,I sought a separate interview with Sethna. Since the two of us were privy to the information that the department had been directed to commence research on the weapon,I asked Sethna whether it would not be more appropriate that he held the post of BARC director,to lead the programme himself instead of pushing Fareeduddin for the post,especially since he was not a physicist. He accepted my point. The post of BARC director lay vacant when Indira Gandhi,on her return to office in 1980,transferred Ramanna back to the DAE.

My third major interaction with Sethna resulted in Morarji Desai having to reverse one of his stands. On one of my visits to his office,I asked Sethna whether he was happy with the PM’s decision to discuss with the Americans their proposal on examining the feasibility of the full scope safeguards to the Indian nuclear programme. Sethna said he was totally opposed to the idea and it was not an American proposal but one initiated by the PM’s secretary,V. Shankar. I pointed out that the PM had told Parliament that it was an American proposal and there was no harm in India discussing it with the US. Sethna pulled out of his file the fax message from the Americans,which referred to the full scope safeguards discussion as Shankar’s proposal and proceeded to outline the US point of view. When I asked,Sethna readily gave me a photocopy of the document,which I then showed the cabinet secretary,Nirmal Mukarji. He took it to Morarji Desai and told him that he was in danger of being accused of misleading Parliament by presenting it as an American initiative. That put an end to further discussions on full scope safeguards with the Americans.

The writer is a senior defence analyst express@expressindia.com

Curated For You

‘False nationalistic pride has no place in science’: Renowned mathematician Chandrashekhar Khare

He set out to build a school for his village in Madhya Pradesh. What followed: Madrasa rumours and demolition

Jana Nayagan Release Date LIVE Updates: January release for Vijay-starrer seems unlikely, Madras HC to hear matter as SC refuses to intervene