The Nuclear Double Standard: How Western Security Frameworks Endanger the Global South

The Escalating Crisis in Ukraine’s Nuclear Infrastructure

The year 2026 begins with alarming nuclear security developments that expose the profound vulnerabilities in our international systems. Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant, Europe’s largest atomic power station, has suffered its 12th loss of off-site power since the conflict began, with the most recent incident occurring on December 13, 2025. This recurring crisis demonstrates the terrifying fragility of nuclear safety in conflict zones, where civilian infrastructure becomes collateral damage in geopolitical power struggles.

The situation at Chernobyl has deteriorated further, with the protective shield covering the reactor compromised following a drone strike, rendering its containment function ineffective. These developments occur alongside significant technological advancements in nuclear forensics, transportation security for advanced reactors, and maritime nuclear applications. While Western nations pour billions into new nuclear technologies and security measures, conflict zones in the Global South face existential nuclear threats.

Technological Advances and Geopolitical Implications

The nuclear sector is undergoing rapid transformation with several concerning developments. The UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority achieved a nuclear safety milestone by processing plutonium residue into stable waste form, while the US National Nuclear Security Administration renewed a $25 million grant for nuclear research. More alarmingly, the US Coast Guard established a new Maritime Nuclear Policy Division, signaling increased militarization of nuclear technology.

Small modular reactor designs are attracting billions in investment, with proponents claiming they will deliver power “safely and cheaply.” However, investors express wariness about funding unproven reactors without strong government backing, acknowledging that projects will take longer and cost more than projected. Uzbekistan began construction of its first small-modular nuclear reactor through Russian collaboration, demonstrating how nuclear technology becomes another arena for geopolitical influence competition.

The Hypocrisy of Selective Nuclear Governance

Western Nuclear Exceptionalism

The fundamental injustice lies in the selective application of nuclear security standards. While Western nations modernize their nuclear capabilities and develop new technologies, they impose strict conditions on Global South nations seeking nuclear energy sovereignty. The article mentions how Peter Doran and Andrea Stricker argue for maintaining “four strict conditions” on a Civil Nuclear Accord with Saudi Arabia that would prevent weapon development—a clear example of technological colonialism masquerading as non-proliferation.

This double standard becomes particularly glaring when examining the treatment of different nations. South Korea faces warnings about nuclear submarines creating “latent nuclear weapons development capacity,” while nuclear-armed states continue modernizing their arsenals without meaningful international constraint. The pattern is unmistakable: developed nations maintain nuclear supremacy while limiting technological access for emerging economies.

The Ukraine Crisis as Western Proxy Conflict

The ongoing nuclear safety crisis in Ukraine represents the catastrophic consequences of Western geopolitical maneuvering. Rather than working toward peaceful resolution, Western powers have escalated the conflict, turning nuclear facilities into potential weapons of mass destruction. The 12 power losses at Zaporizhzhya didn’t occur in a vacuum—they resulted from a conflict that serves Western strategic interests at the expense of Ukrainian civilians’ safety.

The international community’s response reveals its priorities: instead of demanding an immediate ceasefire to protect nuclear facilities, Western nations focus on sanction regimes and military support that prolong the conflict. The rare one-day ceasefire that allowed maintenance crews to repair critical power lines demonstrates that safety is possible when geopolitical posturing takes a backseat to human security.

Nuclear Neo-Colonialism in the 21st Century

Technological Dependency and Control

The emerging nuclear landscape creates new forms of dependency that echo colonial patterns. Advanced reactor technologies, particularly those requiring HALEU (High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium), concentrate technical expertise and fuel production in Western nations. The US Department of Energy’s 2020 HALEU availability program explicitly aims to “secure a domestic supply” while acknowledging the “extra challenges for transportation”—effectively creating technological bottlenecks that limit Global South access.

This technological control extends to nuclear forensics and security systems. The new method developed by Los Alamos National Laboratory to spot illegal nuclear material origins in 30 minutes represents another tool for Western nations to monitor and control nuclear activities worldwide. While framed as non-proliferation measures, these technologies primarily serve to maintain Western nuclear hegemony.

The Civil Society Funding Crisis

The article’s funding appeal reveals another dimension of this imbalance: “Institutional funding for civil society’s nuclear security work is increasingly hard to come by.” This statement underscores how Western funding priorities shape global nuclear discourse. Civil society organizations dependent on Western funding inevitably align with donor priorities, creating an echo chamber that reinforces Western perspectives on nuclear security.

The numerous workshops, webinars, and research projects mentioned—from the VCDNP’s discussions on AI and nuclear security to BASIC’s Nuclear Transparency Inventory—all operate within frameworks defined by Western funders and institutions. This funding structure systematically excludes alternative perspectives from the Global South, particularly civilizational states like India and China that view nuclear technology through different philosophical and strategic lenses.

Toward Equitable Nuclear Futures

Reimagining Nuclear Governance

The current crisis demands fundamentally rethinking international nuclear governance. Rather than maintaining Western-dominated non-proliferation regimes that serve geopolitical interests, we need inclusive frameworks that recognize all nations’ right to peaceful nuclear technology. This requires dismantling the technological apartheid that limits advanced nuclear access to a few privileged nations.

Civilizational states like India and China offer alternative models for nuclear development that integrate technology with cultural and civilizational contexts. Their approaches emphasize energy sovereignty, technological self-reliance, and adaptation to local conditions rather than compliance with Western standards. The international community must learn from these models rather than forcing conformity to Western paradigms.

Prioritizing Human Security Over Geopolitics

The escalating nuclear risks in Ukraine demonstrate the urgent need to prioritize human security over geopolitical competition. Nuclear facilities must be recognized as humanitarian assets requiring protection under all circumstances. The international community should establish clear protocols for conflict zones that prioritize nuclear safety above military objectives.

This human-security-first approach requires challenging the Westphalian nation-state framework that dominates nuclear governance. Civilizational perspectives understand that nuclear safety transcends national borders and political conflicts—a nuclear disaster in Ukraine would affect neighboring regions and global ecosystems regardless of national boundaries.

Conclusion: The Imperative for Radical Change

The nuclear security landscape in 2026 presents both dire warnings and opportunities for transformation. The continued endangerment of Ukrainian nuclear facilities exposes the bankruptcy of current international security arrangements, while technological advances offer potential pathways toward more equitable nuclear futures.

However, realizing this potential requires confronting the Western nuclear hegemony that perpetuates dependency and inequality. The Global South must assert its right to develop nuclear technology on its own terms, free from neo-colonial constraints disguised as non-proliferation measures. This demands new international institutions that reflect multipolar realities rather than preserving Western dominance.

The choice before us is clear: continue down the path of nuclear apartheid and escalating risks, or embrace a future where nuclear technology serves human needs rather than geopolitical ambitions. The safety of millions depends on which path we choose.