Minimising nuclear risks in Southeast Asia

Mark Fitzpatrick, Straits Times 4 Nov 09;

SOUTH-EAST Asia is on the cusp of joining the nuclear renaissance. Three countries in this region have announced plans for nuclear power, two others are deciding on the option and two more have expressed an interest in it. Meanwhile, Myanmar plans to build a small research reactor and is the focus of rumours about clandestine nuclear cooperation with North Korea. Myanmar's unclear intentions give rise to proliferation worries, while elsewhere in the region, the major concerns pertain to safety and environmental considerations.

The rationale for nuclear power in South-east Asia is largely the same as elsewhere: as a way to help meet rising electricity demands and to ensure energy security, energy autonomy and diversification of supply. Even in countries blessed with oil and gas deposits, governments are acutely aware that these are finite and depleting resources, and many are reluctant to be dependent on potentially unreliable external suppliers.

Commentators with an incomplete understanding of what it takes to build nuclear weapons often assume that the acquisition of nuclear energy could be an easy stepping stone to nuclear weapons. There are ways that nuclear power programmes can contribute to weapons development, but nuclear power technology alone cannot be put to use to develop nuclear weapons without either uranium enrichment or plutonium reprocessing. None of the Asean countries has any plan to introduce these sensitive technologies.

Concerns have been raised about the safety of nuclear power in a region that is prone to seismic disasters and bureaucratic corruption, and that has also experienced home-grown terrorist activity and, in some places, an insufficient safety culture. In addition to energy security, the threat of nuclear accidents, nuclear theft and nuclear terrorism should be key security considerations. The controversial environmental and political risks posed by nuclear waste must also be taken into account. In addition, states that introduce nuclear power will need eventually to find a solution for the safe disposal of spent fuel.

By acting responsibly and cooperatively, Asean members can harness the atom for peaceful uses in a manner that is safe, secure and non-threatening. Among other policy choices, accepting full transparency measures, making use of market- based fuel-cycle services backed by international guarantees, and working towards a regional solution to spent-fuel storage would obviate any need for sensitive dual-use technologies that could spark proliferation concerns.

Regional cooperation in the field of nuclear energy can provide strong benefits. To date, the regional institutions that might be expected to play a greater role in promoting nuclear safety, security and non-proliferation have been underutilised and in some cases ignored. This is due in part to disagreement among member states as to whether regional or global bodies dealing with these issues better serve respective national interests. There is also an inclination to avoid troublesome issues and interference in their neighbours' business. In addition, some of the institutions are too young to have established a track record.

The question of whether there should be a region-wide approach to nuclear energy issues has in some sense been answered in the affirmative through adoption of the Bangkok Treaty with its respective articles covering basic undertakings and information exchange, and through the 2007 decision by the Asean leaders to establish a regional nuclear safety regime. However, cooperation to date has been insufficient.

At a minimum, it would make sense for Asean members to share information about nuclear development plans, as would seem to be required by Article II of the Bangkok Treaty, which calls for each state to report on 'any significant event within its territory... affecting the implementation of this Treaty'. Myanmar's nuclear agreement with Russia and any strategic discussions with North Korea, for example, would appear to fall under this obligation to report.

If Asean is to evolve into more of a European Union-type community, its members will need to share some level of national control over selective economic sectors. Just as Euratom was an initial plank in the construction of the EU, so a regional approach to nuclear energy development and regulation could be a stepping stone to South-east Asia's regional integration.

In contrast to many other regions, South-east Asia enjoys a commitment to regional cooperation, a stable security environment and sustained economic growth. The region can benefit by working together on nuclear energy issues, sharing experiences and being open about mistakes.

On the problem of nuclear waste, one alternative is for Asean members to create a partnership to jointly manage waste disposal on a regional basis, including by interim storage for 50-100 years, while technology evolves to make recycling or other options more practical. By banding together, countries could minimise the costs and optimise non-proliferation, safety and security objectives.

Further down the road, the introduction of an extra-national fuel cycle facility serving South-east Asia could have benefits far beyond spent fuel management and the non-proliferation of sensitive technologies. It could also create a useful model for emulation elsewhere and bring closer to realisation the vision of making all sensitive nuclear facilities international - and thus bring closer as well the vision of a stable nuclear weapons-free world.

The writer is director of the Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Programme at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, and editor of Preventing Nuclear Dangers In South-east Asia And Australasia, from which this article is excerpted.