Related Stories Don’t blame India"I have taken the decision to uphold the Constitution at the risk of being unjustifiably dubbed as anti-party""Govt has a rule that only a fixed percentage can join Army from a state. This quota must go""Failure to qualify for the Olympics is the catalyst for the change that needs to occur"‘Long-term big subsidies in energy prices are well worth getting rid of’

We’ll deal with it. It has to be an agreement. The 123 agreement, we have no objection. But it has to be an equal agreement. An agreement between equals. Not the present kind of unequal agreement.

•Will you reopen it (the nuclear deal)?

I don’t know. People say it’s not possible to reopen once a new government comes. That’s alright. After all, we didn’t seek US permission for Pokhran II. Indira Gandhi didn’t seek permission for Pokhran I. She, in a way, upturned Nehru’s policy on that, which was no nuclear weapons. Morarji’s (Desai) policy was no nuclear weapons.

•Can I say that it will be an endeavour to resurrect an agreement between India and the US to take India out of the nuclear apartheid? Do you agree to the broad objective of a treaty like this, forget the details?

Yes, the broad objectives I agree with. There should be a strategic relationship and a treaty with America that takes India out of nuclear apartheid and simultaneously, it should be a treaty between equals, which does not impose any curbs.

•So what kind of legal, legislative changes are possible to protect us against Hyde Act?

As I said, let the Atomic Energy Act be amended so as to ensure that domestic laws of America, such as the Hyde Act, do not apply to us.

•You think that’s a do-able thing?

We can do it.

•Would you rather engage in a discussion on it now, or after the next election?

I don’t think there’s any point in engaging in a discussion that has gone on for nearly six-eight months and in which we are not considered important and the Leftists, who will not touch America with a barge pole, are considered important.

•One thing that has stood out in the political discourse over the past year and a half, there have been differences between the BJP and the Congress, but in your attacks on the prime minister, you keep calling him the weakest prime minister. Is it too unkind?

My reference to his strength and weakness has relevance to the strength and weakness of the office of the prime minister, not to Manmohan Singh as a person. And it is he alone who very often tells people, ‘After so and so, so and so will be appointed Ambassador to America.’ Three days later, the whole thing goes. He says to people, ‘I’ll make you this,’ and ten days later, he says, ‘I’m sorry.’ . . . I’m concerned with the fact that 7 Race Course Road has lost its significance and 10 Janpath has become the prime address in the country. It has never happened before. This is why I call him a weak prime minister, who has allowed devaluation of the office of prime minister.

•You said your relation with Sonia Gandhi is bad. Which is true in a way . . .

I’ve not said anything, I’ve not said it anywhere, but there has been practically no communication between us.

•Except when you meet at a banquet and greet each other. But, for example, at your book release function, not a single Congress person was present. Sad?

Yes. I’d sent invitations to all.

•If there were an autobiography written by Mrs Sonia Gandhi, and you were invited, would you go?

Yes, definitely.

•And anybody from the BJP could go.

Why not?

•Are you disappointed that nobody from the Congress turned up?

Yes. Not bitter or angry . . . I sent an invitation to the prime minister and I sent it to Soniaji also. I got a note only from one minister, Mr A.K. Antony, that he’d not be able to come, but congratulations.

•Looking back at six decades in public life, having known Nehru, Mrs Indira Gandhi, who put you in jail . . .

At no stage was there no communication. In fact once Atalji and I went to visit her (Indira Gandhi), and she was telling us, ‘You are going to Punjab? Why?’ And it was out of concern for our security.

•There was no bitterness that she put you in jail.

Doesn’t matter.

•You came out of jail, then won an election, bitterness could have been there.

No. In fact people who commented on this book, my autobiography, said, ‘Ismey masala nahin hai.’ And when I had come out with Prisoner’s Scrapbook, they said, ‘Ismey bitterness nahin hai.’

•Lekin irony hai . . . The bitterness of today, where has that come from?

I can certainly say there’s no bitterness. But there is no communication. And that’s because of the Congress party itself. And when one sees that their alliance with the Communists seems prompted only by anti-BJPism, nothing else. Anti-Congressism has been a continuing stream in the entire Opposition because of the hegemony of the Congress.

•Would you say that the time has come for the restoration of some sort of communication? What would you do to break the ice?

I don’t think it’s my responsibility to break the ice. I know this much, that when Rajiv Gandhi came to power, his initial meetings with me were very, very cordial; he was in a way very deferential also.

•Did that chance encounter with Rahul remind you of Rajiv?

The biggest difference is that he did not say anything, he just listened to whatever I had to say. It was a very brief conversation.

•As elder statesman, would you take the initiative to at least start communicating?

I don’t think it would be rightly understood. By the Congress, by my party.

•Have your families interacted? Would you invite her home?