My initial
reaction on reading the opinion of S. R. Valluri (Curr. Sci.,
1999, 76, 1181–1183), a distinguished aeronautical engineer and a former
director of the National Aeronautical Laboratory, Bangalore, was one of
shock and disbelief. I believe that his statement is illogical,
incoherent and incorrect and such an opinion, if supported by the
scientific community without discussion, will be positively detrimental
to our national security and foreign policy.
1. Valluri says – Detached
introspection by many scientists after the initial euphoria has raised
serious doubts about these developments (recent nuclear explosions)
against the historical background and potential future consequences. The
introspection of these scientists, is not, however, really ‘detached’
since most of these scientists have their own political
biases.
2. The so-called initial euphoria is
only natural in any national success, whether it is Pokharan I or II or
a PSLV launch or an Agni trial. If this euphoria is not there in an
event as important as Pokharan II explosion, we should worry that some
thing is lacking in us.
3. Valluri says – The recent
explosions can lead to dangerous situations to humanity at large apart
from creating avoidable adverse situations for us. 1 or even 100 more
nuclear weapons in India do not materially affect the size of the
nuclear arsenals existing in the world. It only gives a new equilibrium
position in the world, where India’s concerns carry a greater weight.
The point that the actions of the scientists involved in these
activities have profound implications to the mankind is more applicable
to scientists working for the government of the USA.
4. Valluri notes that we live in a
virtually unipolar world and we do not have any leverage in this world.
The bipolar world of yesterday has become unipolar today and may become
a multi-polar world tomorrow. A country of our size cannot and should
not be allowed to be bullied by the virtual super-power. This can happen
if and only if we become stronger. Guarantees from the so-called ‘big
five’ have no meaning in the ever-changing real world.
5. The destruction let loose by using
atomic weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 by the US is only too
well known and there is no doubt in anybody’s mind about the
consequences of a nuclear war. But this has not made any one the wiser
in the post-world war II era and the USA and the USSR have become two
centres of power only because of their nuclear arsenals. China earned
its due place in the Security Council, only after it demonstrated its
strength based on its nuclear capability. The world is not democratic
and even a country of the size of India will not be heard as long as it
is weak.
6. Valluri says that the code word
BUDDHA SMILED is cynical. We failed the Buddha, when we abandoned the
cause of Tibet. In fact, it appears that Valluri has not appreciated the
Buddha’s stand on Ahimsa. He advocated it as a human value
(parama dharma) and not as a principle of statecraft about
the right of a nation-state against aggression and self-serving
international policing by countries which have bruteforce strength and
no rivals.
7. It is childish to compare the costs
of Navodaya schools and atomic weapons. What is needed is the
optimum utilization of defence budgets to meet our tactical and
strategic objectives. (For instance, one can as well compare the cost of
Navodaya schools and SPG protec-
tion costs of our politicians
and
their families – even those of ex-prime ministers and
their worth to the nation as perceived by the common man!)
8. The conclusion that compulsions of
politicians and some scientists to exer-
cise such options are
responsible for Pokharan II is erroneous. The decision to conduct the
tests was no longer the manifesto of a party, it was the mandate of the
people of India, who elected them.
9. Valluri’s conclusion that we
started the nuclear race in south Asia is a dangerous doctrine. The
environment in which we live with enemies on all sides demands that we
are superior in every aspect including nuclear arms. The per capita cost
in competing with us should be unaffordable for our smaller
neighbours.
10. The scientists in government-funded
organizations have no business to criticize national policies and their
democratic rights as free citizens of the country are subject to the
constraints imposed by the secrecy requirements of the sensitive
projects they are handling. They should be particularly careful in
commenting about things they do not know such as the foreign policy and
the government policies on national security and defence. It is entirely
appropriate for organizations to take disciplinary action on employees
violating their conduct rules.
11. Valluri’s letter amply
demonstrates the fact that scientists cannot be entrusted with the task
of foreign policy decisions. The complexity of the real world
relationships between nations, the course of history leading to wars,
the evolution of foreign policy and strategic issues concerning
development, deployment of nuclear weapons and possible nuclear
disarmament – all these need consideration of people
specialized in these areas. Scientists paid by Government should do
their job, whether it is the job of designing and testing an ICBM or a
nuclear weapon. In fact, the Bhagavad Gita, which Valluri quotes
in the context of Oppenheimer’s reaction, may be used to justify the
proper course of action of Indian scientists.
V. V. S. Sarma
Department of Computer Science
and Automation,
Indian Institute of
Science,
Bangalore 560 012,
India