India’s nuclear test: dud, fizzle or plain lies?
India's 1998 thermo-nuclear test in Rajasthan is now snowballing into a major controversy with scientists demanding a probe and some saying that the bitter truth from the desert sands of Rajasthan has been hidden by a few top scientists for an embarrassingly long period.
India’s nuclear bomb tested 11 years ago in the wild and wind-swept regions of Pokhran range in Rajasthan has now `exploded’ into a full-blown controversy `yielding’ embarrassing details. Three top Indian nuclear scientists have asked the government to set up an enquiry committee so that the nation can know the truth.
Being very critical, three former nuclear leaders — M R Srinivasan, P K Iyengar and A N Prasad - have said that only a probe can bring out the truth. Prasad was highly critical saying he was ashamed that information on the May 1998 thermonuclear test was hidden. The scientists have now asked the government to institute an inquiry to determine whether the test yielded the expected results or failed.
K Santhanam, the project leader of Pokharan II, who first stoked the nuclear yield issue, has also favoured a probe, saying that creation of nuclear power could not be based on myths.
“I think this is standard procedure in science and if there are claims then an impartial group of scientists is normally formed to look into the relevant facts,” Santhanam said.
Asked whether such a probe will affect the country’s image as a nuclear power, he said one should not be carried away by “images or imagery” and that the image must be rooted in solid facts and cleared by competent group of scientists. “So the creation of a myth must be avoided,” he said.
The latest authority to question former president APJ Abdul Kalam and R Chidambaram, former chairman of AEC (Atomic Energy Commission, is A N Prasad, former director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre Former Barc director, Prasad has always been maintaining that the thermonuclear test was anything but a success.
Reacting to the fallout, he was quoted in The Times of India on Friday as saying that “The painful fallout of this episode is that the credibility of the nuclear scientific community and the respectable name of Barc is being damaged by a few at the top.”
In a direct attack on Kalam and Chidambaram, Prasad said: “If all that Santhanam has written is true, then people occupying high places have misled the country. If all the data about the thermonuclear test has been held by one man (Chidambaram), then how can it be scientifically contested or debated? He has kept it under wraps.”
Stressing that there should be a probe by a committee constituted by the government, Prasad said that the team should comprise those having serious doubts about the yield of the test as well as experts who can include former nuclear scientists who have been raising their voices. “It should not consist of only yes men. It should consist of those who are knowledgeable, who have the capacity to investigate such a serious matter,” he said.
“If this committee concludes that the thermonuclear test had completely failed then the government has played a major fraud on the people of this country,” he said.
It may be recalled that Santhanam had gone public on August 26, claiming that the yield from the test was far lower than what the then prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government had claimed. In a recent newspaper article, he had some embarrassing details to disclose - that the test was a failure because the yield was only 25 kilotons, nearly half of what the scientists had then claimed. Soon after the test, senior scientists had met to discuss the failure and decided to bury the Pokharan truth.
What has bolstered Santhanam’s claim is that there was no disturbance to the shafts at ground zero - a proof that the test was unsuccessful.
Now the worrying factor: If the yield was not as expected, India does not possess a credible nuclear deterrent, indicating that warheads on India’s long-range missile could have far less punch than expected.
On August 28, Abdul Kalam contradicted Santhanam’s August 26 statement and took the stand that Pokhran II was successful. But on Sept 1, former Atomic Energy Commission chief Homi N Sethna openly criticised Kalam in television interviews saying that the former president was not a nuclear scientists and suggested that Santhanam was the authority on the nuclear yield.
Santhanam was earlier criticised by Chidambaram, former chairman of Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and the architect of the nuke tests and Anil Kakodkar, then director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. They agreed with Kalam who in 1998 led a team from Hyderabad-based Defence Research and Development Organisation and insisted that the yield was 45 kilotons.
When the issue started snowballing into a controversy, the AEC convened a meeting on September 5 and held Santhanam wrong. The committee said different types of analysis had come to the conclusion that the yield of the thermonuclear test was indeed 45 KT.
But not many are impressed with the committee’s findings. Scientists in Barc, the nation’s top nuclear weapon establishment, have expressed serious reservation.
M R Srinivasan, former AEC chairman, was quoted in the paper as saying that it was time for both Chidambaram and Kakodkar to clarify the position. “In such circumstances I think a peer review is certainly warranted. A lot of information has been published and is on record. So I have really no reason to disbelieve at this stage either Chidambaram or Kakodkar on this issue. However, because of the current controversy, I think the best recourse would be for both of them to clarify the position.
Another former AEC chief, P K Iyengar said, “The government should undertake an active investigation immediately following the statements made by Santhanam in the article. I am feeling really ashamed.”
India conducted five nuclear tests on May 11 and 13, 1998 at the Pokhran range in Rajasthan which included a 45 kiloton (kt) thermonuclear device, called as hydrogen bomb in common parlance.
Source: PTI.