The Middle East's Interrupted Atomic Dreams

As oil prices drop, nuclear power is becoming less attractive in the region. So why is Iran still hanging on to its program?

BY CHEN KANE | DECEMBER 29, 2009

In light of Iran's rapidly accelerating nuclear program, more than a dozen states in the Middle East have also announced their intention to develop nuclear energy programs. The trend has caused much anxiety among members of the global community. It has sparked concerns about the spread of nuclear technology that could contribute to nuclear weapons proliferation in the Middle East, intensify arms races in the region among all classes of weapons, and become a target for terrorist activity. On this site, Joe Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, wrote about the United Arab Emirates (UAE): "After they have developed nuclear technologies, trained nuclear scientists and engineers, and plugged into global nuclear markets, will they go one step further and build uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing plants that could be used to make fuel -- or bombs?"

But the global economic crisis has disrupted the calculus of nuclear power. An alternative to oil that once appeared to be a clear cost-saver has now come to look very unattractive. And countries are responding by shuttering their programs. Currently, there is not a single operational nuclear power plant in all of the Middle East, and the only one scheduled to go live in the near future will be the Bushehr plant in Iran next year. The scaling back of the Middle Eastern nuclear industry seems rational and likely within the context of global trends -- and this fact raises serious questions about Iran's motivations as it ramps up its own nuclear program.

A few of these programs, such as the one in the UAE, originally progressed at a swift pace. The UAE signed memoranda of understanding with at least five potential supplier states, signed a nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States, established a federal nuclear regulatory authority, developed a nuclear material licensing and control system, passed relevant domestic legislation to govern efforts, and joined important international treaties, all within a span of three years. (The average estimated time for a new nuclear energy program to become operational is generally 15 years.)

The main justifications given for this planned growth in nuclear power were long-term security concerns and the need to develop diversified and safe energy resources. The UAE is not alone in having legitimate concerns about matching its energy demand with alternative supplies. Saudi Arabia, for example, has one of the highest rates of electricity consumption in the world (ranked 19th among nations), and its energy needs are growing faster than any other Middle Eastern state's. To meet rising demand by 2030, the country will require additional generating capacity of an estimated 35 to 66 gigawatts.

There is also an emerging profit motivation. If demographic trends and existing policies remain unchanged, world energy demand is projected to grow by more than 50 percent by 2030 -- a demand the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) nations, especially Saudi Arabia, will be increasingly central in filling. The International Energy Agency projects OPEC Middle East oil production will increase from 25 million barrels per day (mbd) in 2008 to 38 mbd by 2030, a 65 percent increase. By 2030, OPEC will provide more than half the world's total oil supply. For oil-producing nations, burning their own crude oil to generate electricity results in a considerable loss of potential export revenues. By building nuclear power plants to fill domestic needs, Middle East oil producers plan to free up their oil and gas production for export to a hungry global market.

Another potential motivation (feverishly denied by officials across the Middle East) is a fear of Iran's nuclear ambitions. The timing of these countries' interest in going nuclear suggests an unease over Iran's expanding program. Although a nuclear energy program will not give Middle Eastern states a nuclear weapons capability, it will allow them to maintain a sense of technical parity with Iran and provide them with the infrastructure to jumpstart a weapons program if they so elected.

Despite all this initial enthusiasm, however, these nascent nuclear energy programs still haven't fully materialized. Several of them have been abandoned altogether, and others have slowed to a crawl.

BEHROUZ MEHRI/AFP/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: NUKES, IRAN, MIDDLE EAST
 

Chen Kane is senior research associate at the Monterey Institute's James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies.

MSBAHARI

6:50 AM ET

December 30, 2009

???

I am quite surprised that an article about Atomic energy in the middle east did not even mention Israel capabilities as a key factor?

I guess this make this article not relevant !!

 

SOULCASE

9:33 AM ET

December 30, 2009

Projection

It's obviously Israel's fault that the rest of the Middle East is horrendously corrupt, technologically retarded, and economically stagnant. Dam thoze krafty Jooz! Of course bombing Syria, Egypt, or Lebanon into the Stone Age would be overkill, as outside of seven or so major population centers, the rest of the Arab World is still in the Stone Age.

 

CARTILAGE

11:30 AM ET

December 30, 2009

zionist claptrap. what do

zionist claptrap. what do you care about corruption and laziness? this is the weakest argument that zionists use to justify Israeli crimes

 

NORBOOSE

4:20 PM ET

December 30, 2009

We Cant Make Israeli Nukes Go Away

Look, the only time countries have ever given up nukes (South Africa, and a few Soviet Break-Aways) is immediately following a revolution, when the new government is looking to create ties to a strong nation (Historically this has always been the US in the few examples it has occured) in order to protect itself during its vulnerable fledgling state. In these cases, there are several common factors: the nukes are seen as a symbol of the previous regime's cruelty, the new nation recognizes its precarious position, it faces intense foreign pressure, it is promised many benefits for abandoning its nukes, critically including the said strong country's assurance of support against the new nations potential belligerants. Israel is not going to give away its nukes. Why would it? From a pragmatic Israeli perspective that would be incredibly stupid. Complaining about its nukes isnt going to change anything. Short of threatening war, there is nothing America can do about its nukes. Israel has nukes, and that cant really be changed. We just have to deal with that in formulating policy. I can not stand people who decide that they would rather bitch about things than search for realistic solutions. Unless your plan is to bitch Israel into giving aways its nukes and then using your magic powers to dissuade the other Middle Eastern nations from their programs, you are just whining. Blame is absolutely, utterly useless in acheiving anything. Try to decide what your goal in regards to this issue is. A. Try to minimize the risk of conflict in the region, especially large-scale warfare. B. Perform catharthis on yourself by releasing anger through anonymous posting. If you chose A and one day you end up starving to death in the woods, you will try to work your way out of it. If you chose B the last thing you will ever think is "if someone had left food on the ground, this wouldn't be a problem."

 

DJYSRV

9:33 AM ET

December 31, 2009

UAE $20 billion nuclear energy contract award to S. Korea

Did you miss this?

Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704905704574621653002992302.html

 

CAMTANKEROUS

8:34 PM ET

February 1, 2010

"The International Energy

"The International Energy Agency projects OPEC Middle East oil production will increase from 25 million barrels per day (mbd) in 2008 to 38 mbd by 2030, a 65 percent increase."

I think there is a miscalculation in your oil production increase. The increase in oil production from 25 mbd to 38 mbd is 52%, not 65% as stated above. The equation 25 mbd divided by 38 mbd = 65.7%, meaning the number 25 is roughly 65% of the number 38, but that does not represent the percent change. In this case the percent increase is represented by 38-25=13; 13/25=.52, or 52%.