Nuclear Energy 2011: A Watershed Year

{
  "authors": [
    "Mark Hibbs"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Korean Peninsula"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [
    "Eurasia in Transition"
  ],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Iran",
    "South Asia",
    "India",
    "Pakistan",
    "East Asia",
    "Japan",
    "North Korea"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Nuclear Policy",
    "Nuclear Energy"
  ]
}

In The Media

Nuclear Energy 2011: A Watershed Year

The cumulative impact of the nuclear developments that occurred in 2012, from the disaster in Fukushima to Iran's continuing nuclear program, will make the world's nuclear future more uncertain.

By Mark Hibbs

Published on Jan 9, 2012

Source: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

The year 2011 marked the first serious accident at a nuclear power plant in a quarter century. After the previous disaster at Chernobyl, the world’s nuclear industry axiomatically predicted that another accident—especially in an advanced country operating conventional light-water reactors—would spell the end of nuclear power everywhere. A year after three US-designed power reactors in Japan melted down in March, that hasn’t happened, but the real impact of the accident on the future of nuclear energy worldwide has yet to be felt. The accident focused attention on Japan for nearly half a year. As the threat gradually receded, the world’s focus shifted back to flashpoints where nuclear crises have been with us for a long time: Iran, North Korea, and South Asia. These weren’t resolved in 2011, and all three appear to be escalating. Two years after the United States recommitted itself to multilateral nuclear diplomacy in 2009, it became apparent that its recommitment was oversold and would not suffice to bridge serious divisions besetting Washington, Beijing, and Moscow—divisions that stand in the way of resolving nuclear crises in Iran and North Korea, or of effectively contributing to a de-escalation of an emerging nuclear arms race in South Asia.

About the Author

Mark Hibbs

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Nuclear Policy Program

Hibbs is a Germany-based nonresident senior fellow in Carnegie’s Nuclear Policy Program. His areas of expertise are nuclear verification and safeguards, multilateral nuclear trade policy, international nuclear cooperation, and nonproliferation arrangements.

Recent Work

Article
Dimming Prospects for U.S.-Russia Nonproliferation Cooperation
- +1
  Toby Dalton, Mark Hibbs, Nicole Grajewski, …
Commentary
What Comes After Russia’s Attack on a Ukrainian Nuclear Power Station?
- Mark Hibbs

Nuclear Policy Nuclear Energy Middle East Iran South Asia India Pakistan East Asia Japan North Korea

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

Article
Build, Not Buy: The Semiconductor Lesson that Indian AI Experts Must Learn
As AI grows more sophisticated, as the supply chains that power it become more contested, and as access to frontier models becomes geopolitically charged, India must begin to ask a different set of questions. Not what applications it can build on someone else’s infrastructure but what the world needs.
Konark Bhandari
Article
India’s Stake in the Global Subsea Cable Race
The Indian Ocean Region hosts one of the densest concentrations of subsea cables in the world. Yet, despite accounting for a significant share of global internet traffic, India’s participation remains limited.
Charukeshi Bhatt
Commentary
AI in Outer Space: Opportunities, Risks, and the Governance Gap
How is AI reshaping space security, creating governance challenges, and where does international diplomacy stand today?
Tejas Bharadwaj, Almudena Azcárate Ortega
Paper
Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with China
After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.
Saheb Singh Chadha
Article
Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai

More Work from Carnegie India

Article

Build, Not Buy: The Semiconductor Lesson that Indian AI Experts Must Learn

As AI grows more sophisticated, as the supply chains that power it become more contested, and as access to frontier models becomes geopolitically charged, India must begin to ask a different set of questions. Not what applications it can build on someone else’s infrastructure but what the world needs.

Konark Bhandari

Article

India’s Stake in the Global Subsea Cable Race

The Indian Ocean Region hosts one of the densest concentrations of subsea cables in the world. Yet, despite accounting for a significant share of global internet traffic, India’s participation remains limited.

Charukeshi Bhatt

Commentary

AI in Outer Space: Opportunities, Risks, and the Governance Gap

How is AI reshaping space security, creating governance challenges, and where does international diplomacy stand today?

Tejas Bharadwaj, Almudena Azcárate Ortega

Paper

Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with China

After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.

Saheb Singh Chadha

Article

Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026

This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.

Vrinda Sahai