You see, I have not joined them, they’ve joined me. And the basic reason for joining is the nuclear deal. Because up to April 5 I supported the nuclear deal. I was in Washington on July 18, 2005 when we agreed to it. I supported Manmohan’s speech on July 29. I supported it on February 27, 2006 even though I was not a minister. But after April 5, when Condoleezza Rice shifted the goalposts of the agreement both in letter and in spirit and talked about NPT, permanent safeguards, annual waiver, IAEA inspection, it was a serious matter.

• What happened April 5 onwards?

What happened is that Condoleezza Rice, in the Senate sub-committee, in the House committee, changed the goalposts. When it was discussed in the House Tom Lantos said, On Iran, you must have a congruent foreign policy along with the US. I said since when, we are a non-aligned country. I have opposed American policy in Iraq, I have opposed them in Iran, I am opposing them on the nuclear deal...

• So you shifted your position on the nuclear deal.

Not me, I’ll give you the example of the sacking of Mr Jack Straw. Three foreign ministers were removed.

• This is the William Rees-Mogg article in The London Times...

And Abdullah Abdullah of Afghanistan, they opposed NATO. My position is well known, they found me uncomfortable. I’ve written to Mrs Gandhi, I’ve told her, Listen, we must have an independent policy.

• So this was an American conspiracy to get you out? To get Jack Straw out, to get Abdullah Abdullah out and to get you out?

What else can it mean.

• As three foreign ministers of three allied countries, three friendly countries...are you making this seriously or are you saying this in a fit of anger.

I don’t get angry. Occasionally I get angry but I never lose my nerve. But I know enough about foreign policy, I know enough about the American System, I know what the neocons are doing, what Mr Bush is thinking..

• So what did you say after April 5? If I understand you correctly, after April 5, because your doubts became well known, Americans targeted you. How did you express your doubts?

I wrote a very long piece on this (in The Asian Age) explaining what’s happened after April 5 and that it’s going for the worse. I wrote to the Prime Minister, I wrote to the Congress president and I spoke in public. I am all for good relations with the US but I am not for India becoming a client state of any country.

• But Volcker had come out much earlier than that.

Doesn’t matter. No country in the world has taken note of Volcker.

• Let me get this right. You are suggesting that the American targeted you along with Jack Straw and Abdullah Abdullah. That only happened from April 5...until that day you were supporting the nuclear deal.

I was.

• So why should they be targeting you? They should have been supporting you.

If you read the Volcker report and find out when my name was added. February 3, 2005, House committee, my name is not there. Then on the 9th my name appears. In the final report it appears. Why? Because my disquiet began from the time this shift took place in Condoleezza Rice. I read them very carefully, and I’d spoken to Condoleezza Rice, I’d spoken to the Congress president and the President of the US, and I said that nothing should be changed. The bottomline is that the deal is about energy, it is not about non-proliferation. The Americans have now dropped reciprocity and come to non-proliferation, to permanent safeguards.

• What has that got to do with Volcker and Pathak and Natwar Singh?

Because Mr Volcker was the Federal Reserve chairman, he was on two UN committees, he has left out all the American companies who made money... He’s put in the name of (George) Galloway, Soekarnoputri. All the names are there.

• So the whole thing is a conspiracy?

It is.

• You wrote to Mrs Gandhi in July (2006). Did you specifically write on foreign policy?

I wrote that this is disquieting, because the Americans are shifting the goalposts. There will be a House resolution, there will be a Senate resolution, which is going to be worse. Then a combined resolution, which will be worse. Let them say it will be reciprocal, the waiver will be permanent...

• But what’s that got to do with you vis a vis your party? Are you suggesting your own party has been bought over by the Americans?

Let me tell you one thing. There is a very strong feeling in the party on the nuclear deal, as it’s shaping from day to day...

• Are you saying that you are being sacrificed because of American pressure, because of your nuanced or changed position on the nuclear deal?

I won’t put it in those specific terms but I am assuming this knowing my background, knowing what the Americans thought of me. When I was appointed foreign minister there was great resistance that I should run the foreign ministry.

• Will you elaborate?

No, I don’t want to.

• But it was substantive or just something you heard?

Yes it was substantive. That’s why it took so long to announce the cabinet. I understand the difference between foreign policy and diplomacy. Foreign policy is what you do, diplomacy is how you do it. Ask our diplomats, they’re very unhappy at what’s going on. Jaswant Singh was running around Mr Talbott, Mr Shyam Saran goes wherever Mr Burns calls him. The Prime Minister should pick up his phone and say Mr President, I have serious misgivings, I want your clarification.