ASEAN's Nuclear Choices and Geopolitical Consequences

• ASEAN nations are actively pursuing nuclear energy to address rising electricity demand, net-zero commitments, and fossil-fuel volatility.
• Nuclear power adoption constitutes a 60-year strategic commitment, as reactor technologies are non-interoperable and tied to specific suppliers.
• Traditional regional hedging strategies—balancing relations between major powers—are ineffective in the nuclear sector because procurement requires a singular choice of technology and regulatory framework.

Key Supplier Dynamics

• Russia (Rosatom): Offers a 'Build-Own-Operate' (BOO) model, providing turnkey convenience at the cost of long-term dependence on Russian fuel, technology, and regulatory support.
• United States, Japan, and South Korea: Provide advanced SMR technology and high safety standards, but require adherence to '123 Agreements' that limit national autonomy over fuel cycles.
• China: Bundles nuclear deals (Hualong One/Linglong One) with broader Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) infrastructure projects, creating deep strategic links that complicate regional territorial disputes.

The Role of ASEANTOM

• The ASEAN Network of Nuclear Regulatory Bodies (ASEANTOM), established in 2013, aims to harmonize safety standards and coordinate regional responses.
• While it cannot resolve technological incompatibility, it serves as a mechanism to improve collective bargaining power against major suppliers.
• Regional collaboration via ASEANTOM is essential to prevent predatory financing, maintain the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (SEANWFZ), and mitigate the risk of strategic entrapment.