Third Way and The National Interest met together in a room full of nuclear experts to discuss what the United States needs to do to rebuild global partnerships. The label “nuclear renaissance,” used in the 2000s before the Fukushima tragedy ended momentum in 2011, is a sensitive topic for many experts. Today, people prefer to call it a nuclear revival or revitalization, a real buildout at home and abroad. But the question is: can the United States do this alone? As our current administration puts forth executive orders to support nuclear, Europe is setting its own atomic policy reversals.

The Four C’s: Commitment, Consistency, Complementarity, and Competition

If the United States wants reactors operating by 2030, we need foreign partners at our side at every step. Cooperation is at the forefront of the nuclear revival; supply chains, technology access, and immigration policy are shaping what is actually feasible. People build reactors, create community, and spread awareness; without people, none of this can happen. Miriam D’Onfrio, Senior Director at X-Energy, put it in terms of the three C’s. 

Right now, we see the commitment. People across the country are pushing for nuclear support, whether students, professionals, or global leaders; nuclear projects are growing. Complementarity is the purpose of alliances; aligning countries that can fill gaps across the supply chain will only benefit the nuclear market in the future. An example of this is Canada, which has uranium and is moving ahead on SMRs.

Consistency is a pressing matter. It seems the stance on nuclear issues shifts with every election cycle, and this is not just an issue in the United States. Known as policy whiplash, policy instability can make it challenging to secure long-lasting international deals. On top of this, the current administration favors approaching nuclear deals one country at a time rather than working through larger international groups.

The effects of policy whiplash are immense and can affect our relationships with the East and the West. The United States aims to use the three C’s at home, but competition might be our reality. Nuclear companies plan for decade-long timelines, but the turn from cooperation to rivalry can be fast.

Where We Stand

The world is currently split into two main nuclear markets, one anchored by China and Russia, and another including the United States, Canada, and the rest of Europe. South Korea is somewhere in the middle, being a Western ally but also competing aggressively in global reactor markets. The eastern model operates under a national strategy, while the western model relies heavily on private developers due to fragmented policy.

Currently, the U.S nuclear relationships with other countries are also governed by Section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act. The U.S. says it can work only with companies and governments that meet its nonproliferation standards. If this is met, U.S. companies can sell reactors, fuel, parts, and services, and share designs and technical expertise. Several of the countries that have made these agreements are becoming long-term partners of the United States. With most understanding that,

“If we fight, we are going to lose together.”

The United States has resolved issues with South Korea and created strong nuclear partners in Japan, Australia, and Poland. Still, the U.S. falls short in providing enough guidance to support other countries in building one of the most complex projects in modern engineering. Companies arrive with a reactor design and a set of PowerPoint slides, while Russia shows up with a complete package. The design, financing, construction, operations teams, fuel, and a promise to take back spent fuel are all given to companies that need support, serving as a virtual pipeline that Russia no longer has to build to exert influence.

ChatGPT: Show Me the Money

Most companies in the United States developing new nuclear technologies are still startups, even with billions of dollars worth of equity; it should not be expected that these companies can solve our long-standing energy issues or the political fallout that comes with such decisions.

You can no longer talk about nuclear without including data centers. As more money and time are invested in AI, there needs to be a way to support this. Over the next decade, AI data centers will be co-located to meet energy demands. The issue? The billions in equity cannot be used for project finance, and the U.S. has never had a PPA that directly led to the construction of new nuclear plants. New projects come with staggering uncertainty and risk, and financing faces similar issues. 

The first order is always the most expensive and the hardest to get off the ground. Nuclear energy can meet the demand for AI electricity, but the nuclear industry has to get off the ground first. After the first successful delivery, the costs of future units can be lower exponentially, but of course, the first delivery always poses difficulties.

To get off the ground, the nuclear industry needs to find a way to reduce costs and build a community. Cost reductions could come from areas the industry has not previously considered, such as high U.S. construction costs. Strengthening nuclear’s position within communities, especially coal communities where plant retirements often coincide with mine shutdowns, brings the proper attention to new developments. 

Fueling Our Future

There is an industry saying that if a nuclear reactor were a printer, uranium fuel would be the cartridge. You can’t print without it. The United States needs a viable supply chain outside Russia, which means an integrated American fuel cycle must be built, especially with current bans on Russian uranium imports. 

The United States is not short on reactor designs, talent, or ambition. What it needs now is political support to match competitors, financing tools to turn designs into reality, and partnerships and consistency to make the fuel cycle a reality. A long-term nuclear revival cannot happen without allies and a strategic national plan.

Resource:

Broughel, A. (2025, November 11). America’s nuclear revival will fail without allies. Forbes.