Safety, security concerns over proliferation of nuclear plants in neighbouring states

Talks about African countries developing nuclear power plants have been on the upswing, with more States keying into them in partnership with global vested interests. Even though the use of nuclear technology is multi-dimensional with proven abilities to radically boost the power sector, among others, there are fears that such could pose a serious risk to the safety and security of States like Nigeria that are yet to jump on the bandwagon, NGOZI EGENUKA reports.

Though countries have strict policies against building nuclear weapons, contained in The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), this has been chiefly adhered to except for nine countries who have gone against the treaty outright.

Countries such as Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea are defaulters, who possess over 12,000 nuclear weapons, most of which are feared to be extremely powerful.

According to the Federation of Atomic Scientists’ 2024 State of the World’s Nuclear Forces, these states have roughly 12,100 nuclear warheads, with over 9,500 in active military stockpiles, a significant decline from the approximately 70,000 warheads owned by nuclear-armed states during the Cold War.

Russia has the most confirmed nuclear weapons, with over 5,500 nuclear warheads. The United States follows behind with 5,044 nuclear weapons, hosted in America and five other nations – Turkey, Italy, Belgium, Germany, and the Netherlands.

The total nuclear warheads owned by these two countries alone account for nearly 90 per cent of nuclear weapons in the world.

Even though the total number of warheads for North Korea and Israel is, unconfirmed, it has been estimated that North Korea has enough fissile material to develop between 40-50 individual weapons, whilst Israel has material for up to 200, with an estimated 90 existing warheads.

Though 34 countries, aside from those who have ownership, endorse nuclear weapon usage, the implication of the technology is dire as a single nuclear warhead could kill hundreds of thousands of people, an estimated 583,160 fatalities, with lasting and devastating humanitarian and environmental consequences like the historic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 to 9, 1945, during the Second World War.

In ownership of this technology, continents with first-world countries such as North America, Europe, and Asia, tend to have nuclear weapons, while the others remain loyal to the provisions of the treaty.

Amid concerns that nuclear arsenals are expected to grow over the coming decade due to the growing complexities in the international space, Africa has been late to the conversations on nuclear weapons probably because there have been greater internal issues to handle.

In recent times, however, there have been talks and partnerships within Africa on establishing nuclear plants. Chief in these conversations are Burkina Faso and South Africa.

After Captain Ibrahim Traoré of Burkina Faso 2023 expressed his desire to equip the country with a nuclear power plant to reduce energy dependence, in February this year, the country signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Russian government, in collaboration with Russian nuclear giant, Russian Atomic Energy Agency (ROSATOM), to issue scholarships for Burkina Faso students to go to Russia and study nuclear science, in an attempt to train future operators of Burkina Faso’s nuclear energy.

With this partnership, the construction of the nuclear power plant is estimated to be completed by 2025, and the project is expected to double the country’s electricity production by 2030.

Also, in February, it was reported that Iran was in talks with South Africa for a nuclear power plant contract. If finalised, this would mark Iran’s first international nuclear power project.

South Africa, which operates Africa’s only nuclear power plant, Koeberg, plans to add 2,500 megawatts of new capacity to tackle electricity outages that have plagued the economy and to reduce emissions.

Though these steps by these African countries have just one focus, electricity development in states. Could these steps accelerate, or expand to becoming creations of nuclear weapons, given that there is always the danger that countries acquiring nuclear power technology may subvert its use to develop a nuclear weapons programme?

This question mortifies the worried because nuclear energy and nuclear weapons both utilise nuclear fission, but their applications differ significantly. While nuclear energy powers electricity generation, nuclear weapons are designed for destructive purposes.

Nuclear weapons and nuclear power share several common features and there is a danger that having more nuclear power stations in the world could mean more nuclear weapons.

For example, the process of enriching uranium and making it into fuel for nuclear power stations is also used to make nuclear weapons. Plutonium is a by-product of the nuclear fuel cycle and is still used by some countries to make nuclear weapons.

The increasing importance of nuclear power for a Third World country like Nigeria that prides itself as the giant of Africa cannot be overstated, hence the reason many are of the view that the country should embark on the construction of its own nuclear power plant and leverage enough investment in the sector.

It is worthy of note that way back in the 1970s, a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prof. Bola Akinyemi, called for the acquisition of a black nuclear bomb by Nigeria.

A former Nigeria’s Ambassador to Brazil, Dr Patrick Dele Cole, while recalling Akinyemi’s call, argued that the black bomb would have made Nigeria more respected, and safer, as well as, raised the continent’s profile in the world.

“Prof. Akinyemi’s call for the black bomb should be viewed against the background of the rising relevance of Africa in the 1970s and the dissatisfaction of many countries as to why the nuclear bomb should only be owned by four Western countries and one Asian country – the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China.

“There was a growing belief that there was nothing in the character of these nations that prevented them from using the bomb; that is, the theory of the deterrence of mutual destruction was being queried.

“In any case Prof. Akinyemi and others had watched how profligate these very countries were in offering nuclear technology to Middle East countries that could afford it. So, why not Nigeria, which by being in the nuclear club would be able to sit on the table with the top nations,” he asked.

According to Cole, the ultimate argument about nuclear weapons is that such a dangerous weapon should never have been made. The mutual deterrent argument is flawed. Nobody should have it. But if those who have it refuse to destroy all of theirs, then they have no right to deny every nation that wants it from having it.

The Director-General of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), Prof. Eghosa Osaghae, is emphatic that nuclear technology doesn’t mean the acquisition of nuclear arms, but the acquisition of nuclear power, which can be deployed to improve/boost electricity and energy supply and other technology purposes, which constitutes a welcome development in Africa.

On concerns that such technology could be weaponised, he said that the nuclear proliferation agreements handle such issues, adding that the use of nuclear technology is multi-dimensional, and also relevant even for agriculture purposes.

A development strategist and policy analyst, Dr Magnus Onyibe, claimed that the nuclear nonproliferation treaty has slowed down the establishment of nuclear plants, adding that the construction of a nuclear power plant in Burkina Faso poses several risks to the rest of the continent.

According to him, the presence of jihadist insurgencies and military coups in the region raises serious concerns about nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands.

He said: “In an environment that is witnessing military insurrection and insurgency, any nuclear accident due to a leak, or any other form could result in devastating environmental consequences, not only impacting Burkina Faso but also neighbouring countries. The Sahel region is a very risky zone that is susceptible to climate change issues, so, adding the risk of nuclear disaster may be too much for such high disaster-prone activities to co-exist in such a highly combustible environment.

“The risks are just too much because other countries may also be setting up theirs and by doing so setting off a nuclear race on the continent of Africa. The bottom line is – Burkina Faso is about to be used as a proxy war candidate between Russia, the new colonial master of Burkina Faso, and France,” he added.

A lecturer in the Department of History and Strategic Studies, University of Lagos (UNILAG), Prof David Aworawo, opines that Nigeria should join other African nations in developing its nuclear technology.

On collaborations, as seen with other African countries to achieve this feat, he said that Nigeria should stop getting attached to groups that tend to limit her options but free herself like she did in the 1970s and was able to interact with countries freely without too much attachment for the nation’s development.

“Kenyan-born American academic and political writer, Prof. Ali Mazrui had for a long time advocated that Nigeria should be that country in Africa with a nuclear power, but the nuclear non-proliferation treaty of 1968, which Nigeria had already signed, made the nation not becoming a nuclear power,” he added.

The don while also clarifying that nuclear technology is not always, and only for nuclear weapons, further stated that such partnerships with Russia and Iran are not for weapons but for nuclear energy, and in this stage of clean energy such collaborations are laudable.

“Nigerians should see how they can take advantage of this and leverage such opportunities to expand their energy sources,” he added.