3 ms·

If any of them really wanted so, they would've build a small clandestine reactor somewhere long time ago. Nuclear bombs are forties technology. Industrial outp

If any of them really wanted so, they would've build a small clandestine reactor somewhere long time ago. Nuclear bombs are forties technology. Industrial output of forties USA is met by dozens of countries today. People continuing to advocate for non-proliferation cannot believe the that the most basic point of theirs is false: from technical viewpoint, from logical, political, and military one.

marcosdumay 5y ago
> they would've build a small clandestine reactor somewhere long time ago. And have some advanced nation genocide all the relevant brains on your country? I would try to lead them in some other enterprise, even better if it doesn't have to be clandestine.
akiselev 5y ago
Of course they can, but they don't. It's extremely expensive and the vast majority of countries can't afford the massive upfront cost without nasty consequences. Most of the 32 countries with nuclear reactors built them using technology from Russia, France, the US, UK, or China. China still builds nuclear reactors using imported Russian technology because its own industry can't keep up with the demand - the demand for exporting Chinese nuclear reactors to countries that US/EU won't sell nuclear technology to. The article we're commenting on is part of the EU and US response - they want to sell their reactor technology to a bunch of countries to prevent China from getting that business and gaining influence, but they want to do it in a way that reduces proliferation because the constituents that vote for them care about nuclear proliferation. It's entry level geopolitics.
pyrale 5y ago
But then, they would have to get fissile material, which isn't exactly an open market. It's easy to justify buying the material if you have a commercial reactor to feed it to, not so much if you don't. In fact, international inspection mechanisms worked pretty well so far.

marcosdumay 5y ago

> they would've build a small clandestine reactor somewhere long time ago. And have some advanced nation genocide all the relevant brains on your country? I would try to lead them in some other enterprise, even better if it doesn't have to be clandestine.

akiselev 5y ago

Of course they can, but they don't. It's extremely expensive and the vast majority of countries can't afford the massive upfront cost without nasty consequences. Most of the 32 countries with nuclear reactors built them using technology from Russia, France, the US, UK, or China. China still builds nuclear reactors using imported Russian technology because its own industry can't keep up with the demand - the demand for exporting Chinese nuclear reactors to countries that US/EU won't sell nuclear technology to. The article we're commenting on is part of the EU and US response - they want to sell their reactor technology to a bunch of countries to prevent China from getting that business and gaining influence, but they want to do it in a way that reduces proliferation because the constituents that vote for them care about nuclear proliferation. It's entry level geopolitics.

pyrale 5y ago

But then, they would have to get fissile material, which isn't exactly an open market. It's easy to justify buying the material if you have a commercial reactor to feed it to, not so much if you don't. In fact, international inspection mechanisms worked pretty well so far.