• Home
  • About RSIS
    • Introduction
    • Building the Foundations
    • Welcome Message
    • Board of Governors
    • Staff Profiles
      • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
      • Dean’s Office
      • Management
      • Distinguished Fellows
      • Faculty and Research
      • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
      • Visiting Fellows
      • Adjunct Fellows
      • Administrative Staff
    • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
    • RSIS Endowment Fund
    • Endowed Professorships
    • Career Opportunities
    • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
    • Research Centres
      • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
      • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
      • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
      • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
      • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
    • Research Programmes
      • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
      • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
    • Future Issues and Technology Cluster
    • [email protected] Newsletter
    • Other Research
      • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
    • Graduate Programmes Office
    • Overview
    • MSc (Asian Studies)
    • MSc (International Political Economy)
    • MSc (International Relations)
    • MSc (Strategic Studies)
    • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
    • PhD Programme
    • Exchange Partners and Programmes
    • How to Apply
    • Financial Assistance
    • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
    • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
    • Alumni
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
    • International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
    • SRP Executive Programme
    • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
    • RSIS Publications
      • Annual Reviews
      • Books
      • Bulletins and Newsletters
      • Commentaries
      • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
      • Commemorative / Event Reports
      • IDSS Paper
      • Interreligious Relations
      • Monographs
      • NTS Insight
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • RSIS Publications for the Year
    • Glossary of Abbreviations
    • External Publications
      • Authored Books
      • Journal Articles
      • Edited Books
      • Chapters in Edited Books
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • Op-Eds
      • External Publications for the Year
    • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
    • Great Powers
    • Sustainable Security
    • Other Resource Pages
    • Media Highlights
    • News Releases
    • Speeches
    • Vidcast Channel
    • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsis.sg
Linkedin
instagram instagram rsis.sg
RSS
  • Home
  • About RSIS
      • Introduction
      • Building the Foundations
      • Welcome Message
      • Board of Governors
      • Staff Profiles
        • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
        • Dean’s Office
        • Management
        • Distinguished Fellows
        • Faculty and Research
        • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
        • Visiting Fellows
        • Adjunct Fellows
        • Administrative Staff
      • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
      • RSIS Endowment Fund
      • Endowed Professorships
      • Career Opportunities
      • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
      • Research Centres
        • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
        • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
        • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
        • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
        • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      • Research Programmes
        • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
        • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      • Future Issues and Technology Cluster
      • [email protected] Newsletter
      • Other Research
        • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      • Graduate Programmes Office
      • Overview
      • MSc (Asian Studies)
      • MSc (International Political Economy)
      • MSc (International Relations)
      • MSc (Strategic Studies)
      • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
      • PhD Programme
      • Exchange Partners and Programmes
      • How to Apply
      • Financial Assistance
      • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
      • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
      • Alumni
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
      • International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
      • SRP Executive Programme
      • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
      • RSIS Publications
        • Annual Reviews
        • Books
        • Bulletins and Newsletters
        • Commentaries
        • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
        • Commemorative / Event Reports
        • IDSS Paper
        • Interreligious Relations
        • Monographs
        • NTS Insight
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • RSIS Publications for the Year
      • Glossary of Abbreviations
      • External Publications
        • Authored Books
        • Journal Articles
        • Edited Books
        • Chapters in Edited Books
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • Op-Eds
        • External Publications for the Year
      • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
      • Great Powers
      • Sustainable Security
      • Other Resource Pages
      • Media Highlights
      • News Releases
      • Speeches
      • Vidcast Channel
      • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
  • instagram instagram rsis.sg
Connect

Getting to RSIS

Map

Address

Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B3,
50 Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798

View location on Google maps Click here for directions to RSIS

Get in Touch

    Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
    RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
    instagram instagram rsis.sg
      RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    RSIS Intranet

    S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
    Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University

    Skip to content

     
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO10040 | US Nuclear Summit: Nuclear Warheads Vs Nuclear Energy
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • Commentaries
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • IDSS Paper
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers
    • RSIS Publications for the Year

    CO10040 | US Nuclear Summit: Nuclear Warheads Vs Nuclear Energy
    Alvin Chew

    13 April 2010

    download pdf
    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Commentary

    Given the new dimensions of security threats triggered by climate change, the United States needs to be forward-looking in its policies to deal with rising energy demands.

    THE JUST-CONCLUDED US Nuclear Summit in Washington is a significant step taken by President Barack Obama towards global nuclear disarmament. It is to be welcomed by the global community as it will, if it achieves its goal, ultimately make the world a much safer place — devoid of nuclear weapons. This “new” thinking is being reinforced at a time of a nuclear energy renaissance in response to the threat of global warming.

    The demise of nuclear weapons

    Nuclear warheads have been developed to achieve nuclear deterrence during the Cold War era. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world has moved towards a more cooperative approach to foster international security. As the known nuclear arsenals are found in various countries, though mainly in the US and Russia, disarmament efforts require the consensus of these ‘nuclear-powered’ states to reduce their nuclear stockpiles simultaneously. After all, the costs of nuclear weaponisation could have been channelled to generate more energy supply.

    Russia shares an equally compelling reason to reduce its nuclear arsenal. The plutonium to be recovered from Russia’s unclassified nuclear stockpile would be more useful if it were to be used in the civilian domain. As weaponisation had contributed to a crumbling of its economy in the past, it is now on the path to becoming a global ‘energy supplier’ if those fissile reserves are put to better use to meet its energy needs.

    With the two biggest states concerting their efforts in reducing nuclear arms, it is hopeful that other nations would follow suit, most notably China and Iran. The example taken by Russia and the US can be interpreted as a strategy to pressurise other nuclear-weapon states to forgo their weapons development programmes. In the case of China, American and Russian efforts will hopefully encourage more transparency for it to declare its weapons ambition. As for Iran, regardless of any evidence of a weapons programme, it is clearly an innovative attempt to motivate the Middle Eastern state to forgo its enrichment facilities.

    New Players

    Both the nuclear industries of the US and Russia had suffered tremendously from the two biggest nuclear accidents in the past – Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, respectively. The levels of social acceptance for nuclear energy dipped substantially and the nuclear industry has been cast in a negative light. Efforts to revive nuclear energy will require decades of confidence building.

    In addition to the two nuclear accidents that had dogged their respective nuclear industries, the US had rubbed salt to the wound of its own industry by conflating the security dimension of nuclear energy with non-proliferation issues. It has adopted the 123 bilateral agreements with aspiring nuclear states, most of whom have decided to pursue civilian nuclear capabilities, to agree on non-proliferation practices. While such an agreement can improve regulation in the industry, it has inadvertently weighed down the US’ own nuclear industry from regaining its leading status.

    Hence, it is clear that the major constructors of nuclear reactors are now France, and recently South Korea, after Seoul won the bid to build the first civilian nuclear plant in the Gulf region. China, with an already available domestic market to meet the construction of its nuclear reactors, will likely emerge as a serious contender in the global arena if its reactors prove cost-competitive. South Korea’s winning formula not only resides in its sterling operational safety track record, it is also more forthcoming in the area of technology transfer and adopts a more discernable approach in its nuclear deal that focuses on nuclear energy, rather than non-proliferation.

    The rising use of nuclear energy

    While the US concentrates its efforts to dissuade the use of nuclear technology, the rest of the world is looking more favourably to the use of civilian nuclear power as an alternative source to deal with issues of energy demand and global warming. It is evident that if the US and Russia do not leverage on their rich experience in harnessing and managing nuclear energy, they will then lose their stranglehold in the emerging industry.

    In order to steer its nuclear industry back to the recovery path, the US now has the extra task of de- coupling nuclear energy from non-proliferation issues – an additional impediment that they had created for themselves earlier. Critics have long understood the clear distinction between nuclear energy and nuclear weaponisation. The US policy of conflating these two issues has stagnated its industry, while not convincing the world to abandon the nuclear energy option. The US policy of not pursuing the reprocessing option has made it lose out to its nuclear counterparts like France and Japan.

    To promote the use of nuclear energy, the US will need to review its previous stance and make changes to its nuclear posture. Neutralising its nuclear arsenal is seen as a move to segregate the distinct objectives of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy. It is sending a signal to the world that while these two issues coexist, the separate policies of non- proliferation and civilian nuclear energy are pursued on different grounds.

    The step towards disarmament in the new century shows that nuclear arsenals are no longer a good deterrence factor in a globalised economy. Instead, nuclear energy will be used to address imminent issues of energy security and climate change. In doing so, the US is taking a bold approach to recalibrate its nuclear policy. It has moved from the state-centric security of harbouring nuclear weapons, to one that promotes nuclear energy to deal with the non traditional security challenges, such as rising climate temperatures. It is about time that the US reflects the importance of the new security dimension in its policies.

    About the Author

    Alvin Chew is currently a Visiting Researcher at the Gulf Research Centre in Dubai and an Associate Fellow of the Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS) Centre at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) in Singapore. 

    Categories: Commentaries / / Americas

    Last updated on 07/06/2022

    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Commentary

    Given the new dimensions of security threats triggered by climate change, the United States needs to be forward-looking in its policies to deal with rising energy demands.

    THE JUST-CONCLUDED US Nuclear Summit in Washington is a significant step taken by President Barack Obama towards global nuclear disarmament. It is to be welcomed by the global community as it will, if it achieves its goal, ultimately make the world a much safer place — devoid of nuclear weapons. This “new” thinking is being reinforced at a time of a nuclear energy renaissance in response to the threat of global warming.

    The demise of nuclear weapons

    Nuclear warheads have been developed to achieve nuclear deterrence during the Cold War era. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world has moved towards a more cooperative approach to foster international security. As the known nuclear arsenals are found in various countries, though mainly in the US and Russia, disarmament efforts require the consensus of these ‘nuclear-powered’ states to reduce their nuclear stockpiles simultaneously. After all, the costs of nuclear weaponisation could have been channelled to generate more energy supply.

    Russia shares an equally compelling reason to reduce its nuclear arsenal. The plutonium to be recovered from Russia’s unclassified nuclear stockpile would be more useful if it were to be used in the civilian domain. As weaponisation had contributed to a crumbling of its economy in the past, it is now on the path to becoming a global ‘energy supplier’ if those fissile reserves are put to better use to meet its energy needs.

    With the two biggest states concerting their efforts in reducing nuclear arms, it is hopeful that other nations would follow suit, most notably China and Iran. The example taken by Russia and the US can be interpreted as a strategy to pressurise other nuclear-weapon states to forgo their weapons development programmes. In the case of China, American and Russian efforts will hopefully encourage more transparency for it to declare its weapons ambition. As for Iran, regardless of any evidence of a weapons programme, it is clearly an innovative attempt to motivate the Middle Eastern state to forgo its enrichment facilities.

    New Players

    Both the nuclear industries of the US and Russia had suffered tremendously from the two biggest nuclear accidents in the past – Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, respectively. The levels of social acceptance for nuclear energy dipped substantially and the nuclear industry has been cast in a negative light. Efforts to revive nuclear energy will require decades of confidence building.

    In addition to the two nuclear accidents that had dogged their respective nuclear industries, the US had rubbed salt to the wound of its own industry by conflating the security dimension of nuclear energy with non-proliferation issues. It has adopted the 123 bilateral agreements with aspiring nuclear states, most of whom have decided to pursue civilian nuclear capabilities, to agree on non-proliferation practices. While such an agreement can improve regulation in the industry, it has inadvertently weighed down the US’ own nuclear industry from regaining its leading status.

    Hence, it is clear that the major constructors of nuclear reactors are now France, and recently South Korea, after Seoul won the bid to build the first civilian nuclear plant in the Gulf region. China, with an already available domestic market to meet the construction of its nuclear reactors, will likely emerge as a serious contender in the global arena if its reactors prove cost-competitive. South Korea’s winning formula not only resides in its sterling operational safety track record, it is also more forthcoming in the area of technology transfer and adopts a more discernable approach in its nuclear deal that focuses on nuclear energy, rather than non-proliferation.

    The rising use of nuclear energy

    While the US concentrates its efforts to dissuade the use of nuclear technology, the rest of the world is looking more favourably to the use of civilian nuclear power as an alternative source to deal with issues of energy demand and global warming. It is evident that if the US and Russia do not leverage on their rich experience in harnessing and managing nuclear energy, they will then lose their stranglehold in the emerging industry.

    In order to steer its nuclear industry back to the recovery path, the US now has the extra task of de- coupling nuclear energy from non-proliferation issues – an additional impediment that they had created for themselves earlier. Critics have long understood the clear distinction between nuclear energy and nuclear weaponisation. The US policy of conflating these two issues has stagnated its industry, while not convincing the world to abandon the nuclear energy option. The US policy of not pursuing the reprocessing option has made it lose out to its nuclear counterparts like France and Japan.

    To promote the use of nuclear energy, the US will need to review its previous stance and make changes to its nuclear posture. Neutralising its nuclear arsenal is seen as a move to segregate the distinct objectives of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy. It is sending a signal to the world that while these two issues coexist, the separate policies of non- proliferation and civilian nuclear energy are pursued on different grounds.

    The step towards disarmament in the new century shows that nuclear arsenals are no longer a good deterrence factor in a globalised economy. Instead, nuclear energy will be used to address imminent issues of energy security and climate change. In doing so, the US is taking a bold approach to recalibrate its nuclear policy. It has moved from the state-centric security of harbouring nuclear weapons, to one that promotes nuclear energy to deal with the non traditional security challenges, such as rising climate temperatures. It is about time that the US reflects the importance of the new security dimension in its policies.

    About the Author

    Alvin Chew is currently a Visiting Researcher at the Gulf Research Centre in Dubai and an Associate Fellow of the Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS) Centre at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) in Singapore. 

    Categories: Commentaries

    Last updated on 07/06/2022

    Back to top

    Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
    Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
    This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
    OK
    Latest Book
    CO10040 | US Nuclear Summit: Nuclear Warheads Vs Nuclear Energy

    Commentary

    Given the new dimen ...
    more info