Balancing Power and Peril: How Nuclear Energy Shapes Politics
Lori Li, Jericho Senior High School 7/27/2026
As global demand for energy and technology increases, nuclear power has emerged as a focal point of international development. This expansion, however, has intensified the worldwide race to become the next nuclear powerhouse. Nuclear energy and weapons are inextricably tied through the same physics and production processes. With the development of nuclear energy succeeding the nuclear weapons of World War II, mass proliferation has ensued, which resulted in a nuclear arms race that stretched beyond nuclear energy. Today, this race is being led by the three major nuclear powers (the US, China, and Russia) and other powers, such as France. Mark Hibbs, senior fellow in Carnegie's Nuclear Policy Program, exemplifies that in the last few years, China “has more than 40 reactors online, and only the USA and France have more…setting up a national export platform to provide future clients with nuclear power plants” (Hibbs 22).
Nuclear energy offers solutions to global issues, such as climate change and burgeoning energy demands. Its infrastructure simultaneously enhances a state’s capacity to develop nuclear weapons. But this risk of mass proliferation also jeopardizes a great-power war through intensified competition among global powers, according to associate professor Martin G. Clemis from Temple University (Clemis COV1). Expansion is inevitable, but having countries accede to governance frameworks, such as the Non-Proliferation Treaty, is crucial to maintain global stability while also expanding energy sources.
Nuclear expansion heightens geopolitical tensions through the inevitable proliferation with technological growth, which global governance challenges only further complicate. Conflicts involving climate change have become national security threats. Richard A. Matthew, professor of public policy at the University of California, Irvine, explains that severe weather events threaten pandemics, displacement, and riots (Matthew 54). Climate change, driven by heavy greenhouse gas emitters, increases the reliance on alternative energy sources, one being nuclear energy. However, despite nuclear energy being a far cleaner outcome to greenhouse gases, “existing governance regimes struggle to ensure equitable access, transparency, and mutual trust,” writes Hassan Qudrat-Ullah, a Ph.D. in Decision Sciences from the NUS Business School (Qudrat-Ullah). These environmental pressures and governance pitfalls make regulating nuclear energy increasingly difficult.
In addition to climate pressures, rapid technological advancements, particularly artificial intelligence, accelerate global energy demand, further driving nuclear expansion. Nikolay Hinov, professor of electrical engineering at the Technical University of Sofia, clarifies this demand, noting that training even GPT-3, older models of ChatGPT, took 1287 megawatts per hour. AI and language learning models already use up 1-1.5% of global energy (Hinov). Small modular fission reactors (SMRs) supply this demand. Stylianos A. Papazis, from the Democritus University of Thrace, explains that SMRs are a stable supply of energy, due to lower costs (compared to fossil fuels) and resilience, enabling “work without refueling [for] up to 24 months” (Papazis). As a result, technological growth indirectly contributes to proliferation risks.
Despite these risks, nuclear energy is looked upon due to its sustainability capabilities. Fahad Alzahrani, along with a team of researchers from the King Faisal University, conducted a study investigating public opinion in Saudi Arabia. Results concluded 82.4% of eligible respondents were open to incorporating nuclear energy into the country because of “trust in government oversight and the addition of a new energy source.” Other common reasons included: job creation, environmental protection, and little fear of nuclear power’s implications to cause health risks (Alzahrani et. al.). Regardless, these same features that make nuclear energy seem appealing make its spread extremely difficult to contain.
Global conventions have drawn attention towards nuclear powers. Lisa May and Martin Werz, from the Materials Testing Institute at the University of Stuttgart, describe delineated goals by global organizations such as the European Union to reach net-zero emissions. The 2023 Scientific Forum hosted by the International Atomic Energy Agency made it clear that nuclear energy is the only solution to achieve that goal (May and Werz). Public support for nuclear energy adds a layer of complexity for governments to manage. As more populations endorse nuclear adoption, increased pressure towards governments to develop nuclear programs expand, even with the security risks. The dual-use dilemma outlines a necessity of regulatory frameworks.
International agreements, specifically the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), are critical. The NPT is the only near-universal agreement that addresses non-proliferation and peaceful nuclear use in one framework. Standardized norms and expectations are established by the NPT, which are expected to be followed by states. Without such a framework, expansion would operate without oversight, increasing the likelihood of conflict in the absence of checkback. Despite the importance of the NPT, there have been concerns regarding its cohesion. In 2008, speculation rose when signatory Iran still decided to covertly develop nuclear weapons, putting UN Security Council members in a panic. Richard P. Stanley and Michael Ryan Kraig, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Air Command and Staff College, write that in the early 2000s, people were fearful of its collapse. The push towards weapons by non-NPT signatories such as Pakistan have threatened the stability of the NPT. When asked if the NPT can be saved, the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center articulates “Only if the treaty's provisions are reinterpreted to reflect the original concerns that prompted its negotiation back in 1958" (Stanley and Kraig 59).
Although the NPT has faced criticism, it is incorrect to conclude that the treaty is ineffective. Criticisms highlight potential for reform, not abandonment. Much of the instability concerns stem from unequal obligations between nuclear haves and have-nots. However, these concerns can be mitigated through reforms such as stricter protocols, increased transparency with technological monitoring, and stronger incentives for compliance. For example, advances in surveillance and data tracking could allow international organizations to monitor nuclear materials, reducing the risk of weapons developing covertly. Qudrat-Ullah reiterates that international consensus-building, turning technological advancements into record-keeping that ensures transparency, and incentivizing participation are key to advancing nuclear energy governance (Qudrat-Ullah). Jayantha Dhanapala, former United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, writes, “the NPT encourages the practice of diplomacy in its conferences. It is a living treaty that, despite its seemingly impossible amendment procedure, has adapted and changed through the Final Declarations of its review conferences and the NPTREC'S package of decisions” (Dhanapala 57).
Some question whether the NPT is really necessary. Oliver Thranert, head of the research unit at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, counters, “to enter the 21st century with a collapse of the nuclear nonproliferation regime would have severe negative ramifications. International coalition-building against proliferation would become much more complicated, if not impossible” (Thranert 328). The collapse of the NPT would be detrimental for the formation of coalitions, inviting a plethora of negative consequences for international relations, sparking more nuclear proliferation (Thranert 328). Despite past issues with the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the treaty stands as the cornerstone of nuclear power politics, fostering collaboration rather than competition. In the context of the world today, the most important decision is to decide whether states should act now or hide under the fear of an amendable framework not working, which would trigger the very impacts these states are trying to solve for.
To conclude, nuclear power is both an opportunity and a risk. It may serve as a solution to global energy challenges, but may also pose threats to international security. Climate change and technological innovation continue to drive nuclear expansion, spilling over to the development of nuclear weapons of mass destruction. With geopolitical tensions at their peak, it is important to regulate behavior through the NPT. Nuclear power is a symbol of promise and peril; it may be a huge advancement towards greener energy and technological development, but without proper measures to regulate it, it becomes an increasing trigger that risks sparking a great-power war. Strengthening the Non-Proliferation Treaty is not just beneficial but essential to ensuring nuclear development is a tool and not a hazard.
Nuclear energy offers solutions to global issues, such as climate change and burgeoning energy demands. Its infrastructure simultaneously enhances a state’s capacity to develop nuclear weapons. But this risk of mass proliferation also jeopardizes a great-power war through intensified competition among global powers, according to associate professor Martin G. Clemis from Temple University (Clemis COV1). Expansion is inevitable, but having countries accede to governance frameworks, such as the Non-Proliferation Treaty, is crucial to maintain global stability while also expanding energy sources.
Nuclear expansion heightens geopolitical tensions through the inevitable proliferation with technological growth, which global governance challenges only further complicate. Conflicts involving climate change have become national security threats. Richard A. Matthew, professor of public policy at the University of California, Irvine, explains that severe weather events threaten pandemics, displacement, and riots (Matthew 54). Climate change, driven by heavy greenhouse gas emitters, increases the reliance on alternative energy sources, one being nuclear energy. However, despite nuclear energy being a far cleaner outcome to greenhouse gases, “existing governance regimes struggle to ensure equitable access, transparency, and mutual trust,” writes Hassan Qudrat-Ullah, a Ph.D. in Decision Sciences from the NUS Business School (Qudrat-Ullah). These environmental pressures and governance pitfalls make regulating nuclear energy increasingly difficult.
In addition to climate pressures, rapid technological advancements, particularly artificial intelligence, accelerate global energy demand, further driving nuclear expansion. Nikolay Hinov, professor of electrical engineering at the Technical University of Sofia, clarifies this demand, noting that training even GPT-3, older models of ChatGPT, took 1287 megawatts per hour. AI and language learning models already use up 1-1.5% of global energy (Hinov). Small modular fission reactors (SMRs) supply this demand. Stylianos A. Papazis, from the Democritus University of Thrace, explains that SMRs are a stable supply of energy, due to lower costs (compared to fossil fuels) and resilience, enabling “work without refueling [for] up to 24 months” (Papazis). As a result, technological growth indirectly contributes to proliferation risks.
Despite these risks, nuclear energy is looked upon due to its sustainability capabilities. Fahad Alzahrani, along with a team of researchers from the King Faisal University, conducted a study investigating public opinion in Saudi Arabia. Results concluded 82.4% of eligible respondents were open to incorporating nuclear energy into the country because of “trust in government oversight and the addition of a new energy source.” Other common reasons included: job creation, environmental protection, and little fear of nuclear power’s implications to cause health risks (Alzahrani et. al.). Regardless, these same features that make nuclear energy seem appealing make its spread extremely difficult to contain.
Global conventions have drawn attention towards nuclear powers. Lisa May and Martin Werz, from the Materials Testing Institute at the University of Stuttgart, describe delineated goals by global organizations such as the European Union to reach net-zero emissions. The 2023 Scientific Forum hosted by the International Atomic Energy Agency made it clear that nuclear energy is the only solution to achieve that goal (May and Werz). Public support for nuclear energy adds a layer of complexity for governments to manage. As more populations endorse nuclear adoption, increased pressure towards governments to develop nuclear programs expand, even with the security risks. The dual-use dilemma outlines a necessity of regulatory frameworks.
International agreements, specifically the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), are critical. The NPT is the only near-universal agreement that addresses non-proliferation and peaceful nuclear use in one framework. Standardized norms and expectations are established by the NPT, which are expected to be followed by states. Without such a framework, expansion would operate without oversight, increasing the likelihood of conflict in the absence of checkback. Despite the importance of the NPT, there have been concerns regarding its cohesion. In 2008, speculation rose when signatory Iran still decided to covertly develop nuclear weapons, putting UN Security Council members in a panic. Richard P. Stanley and Michael Ryan Kraig, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Air Command and Staff College, write that in the early 2000s, people were fearful of its collapse. The push towards weapons by non-NPT signatories such as Pakistan have threatened the stability of the NPT. When asked if the NPT can be saved, the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center articulates “Only if the treaty's provisions are reinterpreted to reflect the original concerns that prompted its negotiation back in 1958" (Stanley and Kraig 59).
Although the NPT has faced criticism, it is incorrect to conclude that the treaty is ineffective. Criticisms highlight potential for reform, not abandonment. Much of the instability concerns stem from unequal obligations between nuclear haves and have-nots. However, these concerns can be mitigated through reforms such as stricter protocols, increased transparency with technological monitoring, and stronger incentives for compliance. For example, advances in surveillance and data tracking could allow international organizations to monitor nuclear materials, reducing the risk of weapons developing covertly. Qudrat-Ullah reiterates that international consensus-building, turning technological advancements into record-keeping that ensures transparency, and incentivizing participation are key to advancing nuclear energy governance (Qudrat-Ullah). Jayantha Dhanapala, former United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, writes, “the NPT encourages the practice of diplomacy in its conferences. It is a living treaty that, despite its seemingly impossible amendment procedure, has adapted and changed through the Final Declarations of its review conferences and the NPTREC'S package of decisions” (Dhanapala 57).
Some question whether the NPT is really necessary. Oliver Thranert, head of the research unit at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, counters, “to enter the 21st century with a collapse of the nuclear nonproliferation regime would have severe negative ramifications. International coalition-building against proliferation would become much more complicated, if not impossible” (Thranert 328). The collapse of the NPT would be detrimental for the formation of coalitions, inviting a plethora of negative consequences for international relations, sparking more nuclear proliferation (Thranert 328). Despite past issues with the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the treaty stands as the cornerstone of nuclear power politics, fostering collaboration rather than competition. In the context of the world today, the most important decision is to decide whether states should act now or hide under the fear of an amendable framework not working, which would trigger the very impacts these states are trying to solve for.
To conclude, nuclear power is both an opportunity and a risk. It may serve as a solution to global energy challenges, but may also pose threats to international security. Climate change and technological innovation continue to drive nuclear expansion, spilling over to the development of nuclear weapons of mass destruction. With geopolitical tensions at their peak, it is important to regulate behavior through the NPT. Nuclear power is a symbol of promise and peril; it may be a huge advancement towards greener energy and technological development, but without proper measures to regulate it, it becomes an increasing trigger that risks sparking a great-power war. Strengthening the Non-Proliferation Treaty is not just beneficial but essential to ensuring nuclear development is a tool and not a hazard.
Works Cited
Alzahrani, Fahad, et al. "Public Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Nuclear Energy in Saudi
Arabia." Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 17, Sept. 2025, p. NA(NA). Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/su17177917.
Clemis, Martin G. "The Enduring Lessons of Vietnam: Implications for US Strategy and Policy."
Parameters, no. 2, summer 2025, pp. COV1+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A846099804/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=d5578817.
Dhanapala, Jayantha. "The Management of NPT Diplomacy." Daedalus, vol. 139, no. 1, Wntr
2010, pp. 57+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A218875611/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=41bd7cdf.
Hibbs, Mark. "China--a nuclear powerhouse? Will China tower over the world's nuclear power
industry through 2050 in the way that advanced Western countries dominated it during the last half-century? Conventional wisdom might suggest that it will, but that answer could turn out to be wrong." Nuclear Engineering International, vol. 63, no. 769, Aug. 2018, pp. 22+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A552410652/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=3cd1a6e7.
Hinov, Nikolay. "The Energy Hunger of AI: Large Language Models as Challenges and Enablers
for Sustainable Energy." Energies, vol. 18, no. 17, Sept. 2025. Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/en18174701.
Matthew, Richard A. "Is climate change a national security issue? The case for linking climate
change and national security is robust but imperfect, and today there is a serious debate about whether it makes sense." Issues in Science and Technology, vol. 27, no. 3, spring 2011, pp. 49+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A255841746/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=318373b4.
May, Lisa, and Werz, Martin. "A State-of-the-Art Review on Nuclear Reactor Concepts and
Associated Advanced Manufacturing Techniques." Energies, vol. 18, no. 16, Aug. 2025. Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/en18164359.
Papazis, Stylianos A. "Nuclear - Thermal Power Generation: Multicriteria Optimization of the
Economic Sustainability." Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 11, June 2025, p. NA(NA). Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/su17114781.
Stanley, Richard P., and Michael Ryan Kraig. "The NPT: can this treaty be saved?" Bulletin of
the Atomic Scientists, vol. 59, no. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2003, pp. 59+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A108008304/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=f04510d3.
Thranert, Oliver. "Would we really miss the nuclear nonproliferation treaty?" International
Journal, vol. 63, no. 2, spring 2008, pp. 327+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A184131471/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=ff45cca1.
Qudrat-Ullah, Hassan. "Advancing Nuclear Energy Governance Through Strategic Pathways for
Q-NPT Adoption." Energies, vol. 18, no. 15, Aug. 2025. Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/en18154040.
Arabia." Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 17, Sept. 2025, p. NA(NA). Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/su17177917.
Clemis, Martin G. "The Enduring Lessons of Vietnam: Implications for US Strategy and Policy."
Parameters, no. 2, summer 2025, pp. COV1+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A846099804/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=d5578817.
Dhanapala, Jayantha. "The Management of NPT Diplomacy." Daedalus, vol. 139, no. 1, Wntr
2010, pp. 57+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A218875611/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=41bd7cdf.
Hibbs, Mark. "China--a nuclear powerhouse? Will China tower over the world's nuclear power
industry through 2050 in the way that advanced Western countries dominated it during the last half-century? Conventional wisdom might suggest that it will, but that answer could turn out to be wrong." Nuclear Engineering International, vol. 63, no. 769, Aug. 2018, pp. 22+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A552410652/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=3cd1a6e7.
Hinov, Nikolay. "The Energy Hunger of AI: Large Language Models as Challenges and Enablers
for Sustainable Energy." Energies, vol. 18, no. 17, Sept. 2025. Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/en18174701.
Matthew, Richard A. "Is climate change a national security issue? The case for linking climate
change and national security is robust but imperfect, and today there is a serious debate about whether it makes sense." Issues in Science and Technology, vol. 27, no. 3, spring 2011, pp. 49+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A255841746/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=318373b4.
May, Lisa, and Werz, Martin. "A State-of-the-Art Review on Nuclear Reactor Concepts and
Associated Advanced Manufacturing Techniques." Energies, vol. 18, no. 16, Aug. 2025. Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/en18164359.
Papazis, Stylianos A. "Nuclear - Thermal Power Generation: Multicriteria Optimization of the
Economic Sustainability." Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 11, June 2025, p. NA(NA). Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/su17114781.
Stanley, Richard P., and Michael Ryan Kraig. "The NPT: can this treaty be saved?" Bulletin of
the Atomic Scientists, vol. 59, no. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2003, pp. 59+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A108008304/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=f04510d3.
Thranert, Oliver. "Would we really miss the nuclear nonproliferation treaty?" International
Journal, vol. 63, no. 2, spring 2008, pp. 327+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A184131471/AONE?u=nysl_li_jhsch&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=ff45cca1.
Qudrat-Ullah, Hassan. "Advancing Nuclear Energy Governance Through Strategic Pathways for
Q-NPT Adoption." Energies, vol. 18, no. 15, Aug. 2025. Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.3390/en18154040.
Proudly powered by Weebly