New Delhi: Brushing aside some comments from National Security Advisor MK Narayanan, former DRDO scientist and the co-ordinator of the Pokhran-II nuclear tests tests, K Santhanam, said Monday that he hoped for at least two more nuclear tests as the country was yet to acquire minimum deterrence. Santhanam's assertion, that the thermo-nuclear test conducted in 1998 was a 'fizzle,' have sparked off a lively controversy in the country.

On Monday Narayanan got a bit theatrical describing Santhanam's claims as being ''horrific.''

In response Santhanam hit back, saying that Narayanan was ''barking up the wrong tree.''

So far, the current prime minister, Dr Manmohan Singh and ex-president  Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, amongst other luminaries, have tried to dampen the controversy by asserting that the  H-bomb test was indeed a success.

Santhanam has dismissed Kalam's assertions as being 'uninformed' as he was not a phycisist.

Kalam, in his capacity as DRDO chief, was Santhanam's boss at the time of the tests.

Maintaining his assertions, Santhanam has now asked for the setting up of an independent panel to probe the results of Pokhran II.

The controversy has reared up at a time when India is already coming under pressure from the current US administration to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), both of which, would legally bind it from testing a nuclear weapon.

Santhanam's arguments that India still lacks minimum deterrence against China, and that there is a need to carry out further nuclear tests, would obviously put the current government under pressure not to sign either of these treaties.

Contesting 'official' BARC data, according to which the H-bomb test was a success, Santhanam said that there was a need to reanalyse the test data.

''The trouble lies in what data was included in the BARC analysis and what was not...There is a wealth of seismic and other data, which reveal that the thermonuclear device underperformed,'' Santhanam said. ''There is a large body of evidence in seismology circles around the world and India, which raised doubts about the yield, immediately after the test,'' he added.

This was by way of a counter to Narayanan who was asserting on Monday that nobody could contest the proven data of the Pokhran tests.

According to Santhanam, the hydrogen bomb test, which was the most powerful of the three tests conducted on 11 May 1998, did not produce the desired yield. He also claimed that the physical evidence at the site was also another proof of the failure of the thermo-nuclear device.

According to Santhanam, the Atomic Energy Commission and BARC could not be 'judge and jury' on the claims of the thermo-nuclear yield. ''There is a strong and clear need to form a group of stalwarts and give them access to all relevant data. Only then will credibility increase,'' he said.

Addressing a persistent query, as to why it took him 11 years to raise the Pokhran issue, he responded saying that he had already told the government about the failure of the test in 50-page classified report submitted in 1998.