Newsletter No.
1437
News-Analysis
August 17, 2009
The following newsletter has
been written by David Adam Stott (Shingetsu
Member No. 17). Stott is based at The University of Kitakyushu.
This article originally appeared at The Asia-Pacific Journal:
Japan Focus.
JAPAN AND THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: A NUCLEAR FAMILY?
Concerned about the sustainability
of its oil and gas reserves, the United Arab Emirates (UAE)
has been taking steps to diversify its economy and reduce
its dependence on natural resource exports. The most eye-catching
of these changes has been the rapid development of Dubai as
a finance, services, and travel hub in the last decade. A
further plank in this strategy has recently been revealed:
UAE plans to embark upon a nuclear power programme. Emphasising
transparency and close cooperation with the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it hopes to have the first of
its reactors on line by 2017.
Rather than taking the more
tortuous route of developing indigenous expertise, the Emirates
have been proposing joint-venture schemes with foreign contractors
to construct and operate its nuclear power plants. Japan became
the fourth such country to sign a bilateral nuclear cooperation
agreement after France, the USA, and the UK. To secure their
participation, and to maintain its image as an outward-looking,
foreign investment-friendly nation, the Emirates has stressed
that it will not enrich uranium itself but import nuclear
fuel for its plants. These supplies will come from a foreign
partner and, furthermore, the UAE will return all spent nuclear
fuel rather than reprocess it. The IAEA will also have the
right to conduct snap inspections and be allowed unlimited
access to the nuclear sites. This stands in marked contrast
to Iran, which persists with enrichment which can be used
for producing weapons material despite claiming its nuclear
programme is also aimed solely at generating electricity.
To acquire nuclear weapons it is necessary to either pursue
uranium enrichment or develop spent fuel reprocessing capabilities
which can produce the necessary plutonium.
Given the furore over Iran’s
nuclear programme, the UAE’s plans could potentially
transform the landscape for nuclear power generation in West
Asia and beyond. Critics contend that even strictly civilian
nuclear programmes could lead to nuclear proliferation in
the region, especially given the risks of illicit trade and
the UAE’s history of close ties with Iran. However,
supporters argue that the UAE’s programme will set a
good example for other potential developers of nuclear power
in West Asia, most notably Iran. At present, IAEA Director
General Mohamed El-Baradei is among the many who believe that
Israel is the only state in West Asia to actually possess
nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. (Despite hiding
behind a policy of so-called “nuclear opacity,”
Israel is widely believed to possess between 75 and 400 nuclear
warheads.) Indeed, in response to Israel’s suspected
nuclear capability, many Arab states have frequently called
for West Asia and North Africa to be free of nuclear weapons.
Given the lack of American pressure on Israel, Iran’s
enrichment programme, and the increasing number of countries
exploring nuclear power in the region, this is unlikely to
materialise.
Although the UAE has so far
held discussions with various nuclear producers such as the
United States, France, Britain, Germany, Russia, China, and
South Korea, this paper will focus largely on Japan’s
role in the programme. Firstly, it will briefly examine the
history of nuclear power in both the UAE and Japan. Thereafter,
the motivations of Japan and the other foreign bidders will
be considered before conclusions are drawn.
The Need for Nuclear Power in the Gulf
The six members of the Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC) –- the UAE, Kuwait, Saudi
Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, and Oman -- rely exclusively on fossil
fuels for electricity generation and have been experiencing
5-7% annual demand growth in recent years. Given their locations,
water desalination also consumes large qualities of oil and
gas. A 2009 report estimates that electricity demand in the
GCC block will increase 10% per annum to 2015, accompanied
by desalination demand rising annually by 8%, in total requiring
60 gigawatts of electricity (GWe) of new capacity by 2015
(World Nuclear Association, “Nuclear Power in the United
Arab Emirates,” June 2009).
To meet future demand, the
GCC states announced in December 2006 that they were looking
into harnessing nuclear energy. All six members are signatories
to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and France
quickly signaled its willingness to cooperate, whilst Iran
also promised assistance. GCC members, led by Saudi Arabia,
agreed in February 2007 with the IAEA to launch a feasibility
study into a GCC-wide nuclear power and desalination scheme,
with Riyadh envisioning a programme emerging around 2009.
However, since the IAEA submitted
a pre-feasibility study to the regional body in late 2007,
there has been no progress in any joint GCC nuclear programme,
and various member states have consequently signed their own
bilateral agreements with established nuclear energy producers.
Most recently, Oman signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
with the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom) in
July 2009. In January 2008, Qatar and France inked a similar
deal. Bahrain subsequently sealed a nuclear energy MoU with
the United States in March 2008, and Manama has also indicated
it will forgo enrichment and reprocessing technology and equipment.
As in the UAE, it intends to purchase nuclear fuel on the
international market instead. Both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia
are presently discussing the content and scope of their own
bilateral nuclear cooperation deals with France. An agreement
with Riyadh is likely to be signed by the end of 2009. Of
the non-GCC members in the region, both Yemen and Jordan have
signaled their interest in harnessing nuclear energy. Indeed,
the latter already has nuclear cooperation agreements with
Britain, Canada, France, the United States, Russia, China,
and South Korea, as well as Japan.
Notwithstanding, the deal
with the UAE contains significantly more substance than the
other bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements with other
GCC members. Indeed, the UAE has been in the vanguard of such
unilateral moves, and in April 2008 independently published
a comprehensive nuclear energy policy outline. This white
paper was assembled with input from the IAEA and the governments
of France, the USA, Britain, Russia, China, Japan, Germany,
and South Korea. It forecast electricity demand growing by
9% per annum from 15.5 GWe in 2008 to over 40 GWe in 2020,
with natural gas supplies sufficient for only half of this.
At present, around 98% of the UAE’s total capacity is
derived from gas. Indeed, in 2008, Abu Dhabi, the wealthiest
and biggest of the seven Emirates with the largest oil reserves,
began importing natural gas from Qatar as its own deposits
contain too much sulphur to make power generation cost effective.
Imported coal was dismissed as an option to meet this shortfall
due to environmental and energy security implications, whilst
buttressing extant oil and diesel generation was also discounted
due to environmental and cost concerns.
The reason for this increasing
demand has been the urbanisation and construction boom of
the last decade, as record oil revenues have fuelled economic
expansion and population growth. Indeed, the UAE was one of
the fastest growing economies in the world between 2000 and
2007, achieving a compound annual growth rate of 9.3% in the
five years to the end of 2007. (Figures from Global Research,
part of Kuwait’s Global Investment House.)
In particular Dubai, the largest
city in the Emirates, has been at the forefront of these changes,
as it strives to remodel its economy from reliance on almost
depleted natural resource exports. For instance, the Dubai
Mall is the largest shopping centre in the world and Dubailand
will be the largest amusement park when it fully opens in
2012, two times bigger than Florida’s Disney World.
The city is also slated to have the most comprehensive metro
system, the biggest airport, the longest waterfront, and the
largest indoor skiing facility. Perhaps the most startling
of these developments are the three man-made Palm Islands
(Palm Jumeirah, Palm Jebel Ali, and Palm Deira) which will
add 520 kilometres of beaches to Dubai’s coastline.
A similar development is The World, an artificial archipelago
of some three hundred islands shaped in the image the Earth’s
landmass, located four kilometres off the coast. Naturally,
such huge projects require ever-increasing electric capacity
to sustain them, straining the UAE’s power grid.
Power projections readjusted
to account for the present global downturn are difficult to
assess as no-one can safely predict how long and how deep
the decline will be. Whilst some of Dubai’s mega projects
will likely be delayed by the global credit crisis, its economy
is still growing, albeit only by an estimated 2.5% in 2009.
(According to a February 2009 estimate by Dubai’s chief
economist Raed Safadi. The International Monetary Fund (IMF)
estimates that growth for the UAE as a whole will fall to
3.3% in 2009 from 7.4% in 2008.) Much of this growth is being
fuelled by government investment in major infrastructure projects
and other public spending.
Whilst the country’s gas deposits are limited, the UAE
as a whole still retains substantial oil reserves. Thus, with
the high commodity prices of recent years, nuclear energy
would enable the GCC’s oil and gas producers to reap
rich rewards by selling more of their natural resources to
foreign buyers. Furthermore, the UAE envisages that it can
produce electricity from nuclear power at just a quarter the
cost of gas. Whilst this figure does seem exaggerated, studies
from Europe and North America indicate that over time nuclear
power is generally the most cost effective option for increasing
the capacity of a power grid, unless a territory does not
have to import coal and gas. (For an overview of studies conducted
by the OECD, the European Commission and various North American
institutions, see World Nuclear Association, “The Economics
of Nuclear Power,” June 2009. Interestingly, nuclear
costs were highest in Japan.)
Since the announcement of
the nuclear scheme, proposed generating capacity has twice
been revised upwards. The authorities originally hoped to
have two 1600 megawatt (MW) nuclear plants running by 2016,
but this was subsequently changed to three 1500 MW plants
on line by 2020. With Abu Dhabi being the driving force behind
the nuclear project, it was speculated that two reactors would
be sited between Abu Dhabi and Ruwais, with a third probably
on the Indian Ocean coast at Al Fujayrah. However, in May
2009 it was finally confirmed that the first nuclear power
plant will be constructed at Al Bayyaa, close to the Saudi
Arabian border. Construction will take place in three phases
with a capacity of 5000 MW upon completion, much larger than
the original projection. Thus, each phase will be 1,650 MW.
First phase construction is expected to begin in 2012, with
completion by 2017. The second and third phases are expected
to be finished in 2018 and 2019 respectively. It was announced
that the reactors will be financed by the government, without
resorting to loans, although future equity partners have not
been ruled out.
The gestation of the nuclear
scheme gathered steam in mid-2008 when the UAE appointed an
ambassador to the IAEA, and established a Nuclear Energy Program
Implementation Organisation upon its recommendation. The national
Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) was subsequently
founded, charged with facilitating all nuclear power projects
within UAE. It is the ENEC which has been dealing with all
the prospective foreign suppliers of technology and expertise.
Rather than taking the more tortuous route of developing indigenous
expertise, the ENEC has been proposing joint-venture schemes
with foreign contractors to construct and operate its nuclear
power plants. It is understood the UAE will standardise on
one technology, namely third-generation light water reactors
(LWR), the current standard in nuclear plants.
Whilst economic considerations
are the driving force behind these nuclear plans, there is
also a growing awareness in the UAE that it should reduce
its environmental footprint. Indeed, 2005 statistics compiled
by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) revealed that the country
had the world’s highest per-capita ecological footprint
at 9.5 global hectares, ahead of the United States and Kuwait,
and much higher than the global average of 2.1 hectares. This
followed similar data from 2003 in which the UAE already had
the world’s biggest ecological footprint at 11.9 global
hectares, compared to 9.6 hectares for the USA and a global
average of 2.2 hectares. These figures refer to the amount
of productive land and sea area required to generate the consumption
of an average individual but they ignore aircraft emissions.
(See the WWF’s “Living Planet Report 2008,”
which presented the 2005 data. Its 2006 report featured the
2003 data. Nevertheless, the UAE’s overall demand on
global resources was less than half of one percent in 2005.)
Such reports have embarrassed the Emirati authorities somewhat
and provide another justification for nuclear power. Unlike
power generation from coal, oil, or natural gas, nuclear power
plants do not emit carbon dioxide. Instead, the energy locked
inside the nuclei of uranium atoms is turned into electricity.
Therefore, despite the accident hazards and the problem of
radioactive waste treatment, nuclear power is championed by
some as a ‘clean’ alternative to fossil fuel power
generation.
Indeed, the nuclear option
is just one of the UAE’s resource-conserving schemes.
In 2006 Abu Dhabi unveiled its plans for Masdar City to become
the world’s first zero-carbon city, power for which
will primarily come from a large photovoltaic solar power
plant. The first phase, already the largest solar power grid
in West Asia and North Africa, opened in July 2009. With renowned
architect Norman Foster at the helm, it is hoped that car-free
Masdar will be completely self-sustaining, being key to Abu
Dhabi’s transformation into a world technological centre
rather than just a large consumer. Masdar is expected to fulfill
a commercial role as a base for manufacturing facilities specialising
in green technologies, and will be home to around fifty thousand
people. To this end, the city will host the International
Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), an intergovernmental organisation
formed in January 2009 for encouraging the worldwide adoption
of renewable energy. With Masdar, Abu Dhabi is thus aiming
to kick start an entirely new industrial sector based on sustainable
energy.
A Japanese presence is visible
in Masdar too. In January 2009, Masdar’s investment
arm, the Masdar Clean Tech Fund, announced a venture fund
with Japan’s SBI Holdings to invest in firms involved
in solar, wind and other alternative energy. The two companies
agreed to put in US$10 million each, with each chosen startup
to receive around US$2 million. It was also reported that
the two firms were in talks to boost investment to around
US$200 million to US$300 million, after the first US$20 million
fund was exhausted. (Reuters, “UAE Fund to Invest in
Japan Renewable Energy Firms,” January 22, 2009.)
Japan and the UAE’s Nuclear Energy
Japan is the world’s
third-biggest generator of nuclear power after France and
the United States. In response to the first oil shock in 1973,
nuclear energy became a national strategic priority. As of
2009, Japan has fifty-five reactors on line, with a total
capacity of 47,577 megawatts (MW), along with two reactors
(2,285 MW) under construction and twelve other reactors (16,045
MW) in the pipeline. The on line reactors account for approximately
30% of the country’s electricity capacity, and that
is projected to rise to at least 40% by 2017.
Japan imported her first commercial
nuclear power reactor from the UK, which began operating in
July 1966, and thereafter set about developing its own indigenous
expertise. In the 1970s the number of commercially operating
reactors was steadily increased by purchasing designs from
and cooperating with American firms. By the end of the decade,
such technology transfers had enabled companies such as Hitachi,
Toshiba, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to design and build
their own nuclear power plants, and subsequently export this
technology to neighbouring countries and further afield.
Nuclear cooperation between
Japan and GCC member countries was first mooted in May 2007
when then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited Qatar. At the
time, it was reported that he rebuffed his hosts’ request
for Japanese assistance in acquiring nuclear technology. However,
as France, the US, and the UK subsequently inked similar deals
with the UAE in 2008 and early 2009, Tokyo performed a volte
face. The first rumblings that Japan might change its stance
towards the GCC came in May 2008 when Takeshi Kondo, Japan’s
Ambassador to Bahrain, revealed that Tokyo was willing to
help his host country develop a civilian nuclear power station.
In December 2008 it became
apparent that the UAE was locked in talks with the Japanese
government over developing civilian nuclear power capabilities.
A UAE delegation, led by ENEC president Muhammad al-Hammadi,
visited Tokyo in December 2008 for a week, met representatives
of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), visited a nuclear power
plant, and toured Hitachi and Toshiba factories. (Megumi Yamanaka,
“UAE Seeks Japan’s Help to Develop Nuclear Power
Plants,” Bloomberg, December 5, 2008.) Subsequently,
on January 15, 2009, Condoleezza Rice, then US secretary of
state, and Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahayan, the UAE foreign
minister, signed a bilateral agreement for peaceful nuclear
cooperation. Just four days later Ministry of Economy, Trade
and Industry (METI) Senior Vice-Minister Takamori Yoshikawa
and the UAE’s Foreign Affairs Undersecretary Saif Sultan
al-Aryani inked a similar pact defining Japanese assistance
to the same programme.
Japan will focus on the training
and education necessary to construct and manage a civilian
nuclear plant. Before the partnership can be realised, the
two countries are required by international law to sign a
treaty guaranteeing that the technology involved will be used
for civilian energy only and not for military purposes. Once
in place, Japanese manufacturers will be able to sell their
reactors to the UAE.
As the fourth major player
to have signed a nuclear cooperation agreement with the UAE,
Japanese policy has essentially been reactive rather than
proactive despite its heavy dependence on GCC oil and, increasingly,
gas. Aside from the UAE, it remains to be seen if Tokyo will
conclude similar deals other interested parties in the GCC,
such as Bahrain and Qatar. Even though ties with the latter
in particular are drawing closer due to Qatar’s huge
natural gas reserves, established practice points to Japan
once again waiting until the US or perhaps other Western powers
make the first move.
Foreign Investment Competition
Rather than taking the more
tortuous route of developing indigenous expertise, the ENEC
has been proposing joint-venture schemes with foreign contractors
to construct and operate its nuclear power plants. These will
be similar to its existing water and electricity set ups in
which the government has a 60% stake and 40% is owned by joint
venture partners. As the ENEC originally invited nine companies
to submit proposals for the construction of its first nuclear
power plant, Japan has been facing stiff competition to break
into this lucrative new market. The UAE first signed a full
nuclear cooperation agreement with France in January 2008,
followed by a Memorandum of Understanding with the UK in May
2008 and subsequently the US and Japan in January 2009. On
June 22, 2009, South Korea became the latest country to sign
such a deal during a visit by Prime Minister Han Seung-soo.
In mid-May 2009, ENEC reduced
this original nine to a shortlist of three consortia for building
and operating the first plant. These are the French team of
GdF Suez, Areva, and Total; an American-Japanese consortium
of GE Hitachi and Westinghouse, a subsidiary of Toshiba; and
Korea Electric Power Corporation with Hyundai Engineering
& Construction. After the selection process is completed,
it is expected that one of these bidders will sign a contract
in late 2009 for construction of the first phase of the Al
Bayyaa nuclear facility.
Other deals are already in
place. A five-year contract was sealed with American firm
Thorium Power to help formulate the UAE’s nuclear regulatory
agency. The ENEC has also inked a ten-year contract with CH2H
Hill, an American project management firm, to oversee the
programme. Specifically, CH2H Hill is helping the ENEC choose
the main contractors and will manage plant construction. Good
Harbor Consulting, whose chairman is former White House national
security official Richard Clarke, has been tasked with handling
the physical security of the power plants, in particular the
safety of the reactors.
Even though the prime contractor
has yet to be selected, the French consortium is quietly confident.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has been particularly proactive
in nuclear diplomacy since entering office in May 2007. In
trying to promote the French civilian nuclear industry worldwide,
he has signed several bilateral agreements to build nuclear
reactors or extend technical assistance, namely with Morocco,
Algeria, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Tunisia, Jordan,
India, and China. The agreement with the UAE is the most comprehensive
of these and was sealed during Sarkozy’s tour of the
Middle East in January 2008. French companies Areva and Suez
already jointly operate a power and desalination station in
Abu Dhabi.
Nuclear cooperation between
the UAE and US has been threatened by revelations of torture
committed by Sheikh Issa bin Zayed al Nahyan, a member of
the UAE’s ruling family. The sheikh was videotaped near
Abu Dhabi personally brutalising a business associate. To
the dismay of American proponents of the nuclear deal, the
tape was submitted as evidence in a federal civil law suit
filed in Houston by Bassam Nabulsi, another former business
partner and a Lebanese-born U.S. citizen resident in Houston.
The case fuels criticism of Washington for ignoring human
rights to maintain good terms with a rich autocratic regime
in a strategically vital region.
Regardless of the outcome
however, there seem to be at least three motivating factors
behind the sudden scramble to get involved in the UAE’s
nuclear industry: consolidating oil and gas agreements; opening
up a new market; and setting an example to Iran and others
in the region intent on developing nuclear power.
Oil and Gas
In an era of increasing resource
nationalism in which host governments seek greater control
of the natural resources in their territories, foreign firms
have been maneuvering to retain exploration rights in the
UAE. Even in the investment-friendly Emirates, the renewal
of existing oil and gas concessions has been a concern. For
example, Abu Dhabi Co. for Onshore Operations (ADCO) –-
in which foreign partners BP, Exxon, Shell, Total, and Partex
share a 40% stake -– faces the expiration of its concession
at the end of 2013. In an attempt to generate further competition
for its finite resources, Abu Dhabi has been refusing to renew
the contract without first soliciting bids from other parties.
Indeed, despite calls from Oil Minister Mohammed bin Dhaen
Al Hamli for more oil and gas investments, in recent years
the Emirates have granted only a handful of concession extensions,
mostly to US operations. By contrast, on January 22, 2009,
just three days after the signing of the Japan-UAE nuclear
cooperation agreement, it was revealed that the Abu Dhabi
Oil Company (ADOC) had been granted a twenty-year extension
of its offshore concession rights in Abu Dhabi. ADOC’s
45-year concession was due to expire in 2012, and it was announced
that the firm may also receive additional exploration rights
after renewal three years hence. ADOC is a subsidiary of Cosmo
Oil, Japan’s fourth biggest refiner, in which the Abu
Dhabi government acquired a 20% stake in 2007.
The UAE is Japan’s second
largest supplier of oil after Saudi Arabia, supplying 23.8%
of Japan’s crude oil imports in 2008. Likewise, Japan
is the biggest buyer of oil from the UAE, accounting for almost
40% of the UAE’s total crude exports in 2008. The Tokyo
Electric Power Company (TEPCO) is also the biggest buyer of
liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Abu Dhabi’s Adgas.
Therefore, it is not wholly surprising that ADOC was granted
an extension to its oil concession, especially given the contemporaneous
signing of the bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement.
Japan’s crude oil imports in 2008 (METI figures):
73.7% - GCC Zone
27.8% - Saudi Arabia
23.8% - UAE
11.8% - Iran
10.8% - Qatar
7.6% - Kuwait
3.4% - Russia
3.2% - Indonesia
2.4% - Sudan
2.1% - Oman
1.6% - Saudi-Kuwaiti Neutral Zone (Khafji)
1.5% - Vietnam
1.2% - Australia
1.0% - Iraq
Given that Japan’s so-called “New National Energy
Strategy,” adopted in late May 2006, calls for stronger
relations with resource-rich nations, Tokyo has also been
keen to seal a free trade agreement (FTA) with the GCC. However,
talks have been dragging on since 2004 without reaching conclusion.
Whilst the Japanese government wants an FTA to secure stable
energy supplies, the GCC wants to see greater Japanese investment
and technology transfers in other sectors besides fossil fuels.
Until the recent economic downturn, Japan’s exports
of steel and machinery to GCC members were increasing rapidly,
while the GCC enjoys a healthy trade surplus with Japan thanks
to its oil and gas exports. Indeed, Japan’s trade with
the GCC increased by 43.1% from 2007 to 2008 -- exports to
the GCC rose by 28.4%, and imports increased by 46.3%. (Japan
External Trade Organization (JETRO), “Japan-GCC Trade
for the Year 2008,” May 12, 2009.)
The Emirates, in particular,
are especially keen to boost Japanese investment in manufacturing
in order to help diversify their economy and enhance job opportunities
for a burgeoning population. Despite increasingly close commercial
ties, foreign direct investment from Japan in the UAE is comparatively
small. As part of this energy strategy, in May 2007 the government-backed
Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) signed a partnership
agreement with Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), a firm
wholly owned by the Abu Dhabi government. There followed,
in December 2007, a loan agreement of up to US$3 billion with
ADNOC, in order to secure a stable supply of crude oil from
the Emirates. This loan enabled Japanese oil companies to
sign five-year contracts with ADNOC, guaranteeing delivery
of 120,000 barrel of crude oil per day. (Japan Bank for International
Cooperation (JBIC), “JBIC Signs Loan Agreement with
ADNOC,” December 18, 2007.)
In order to consolidate stable
oil supplies, it was anticipated that the JBIC will further
its loan programme in the coming years to assist the UAE in
boosting both oil production and its wider economy. In the
meantime, the bolstering of airline connections between the
two countries would appear to be the precursor for a closer
bilateral relationship. Given Japan’s need for stable
oil supplies and the UAE’s desire to incorporate cutting
edge technologies into its economic portfolio, the interests
of both countries seem to dovetail nicely.
New Markets
Naturally, nuclear cooperation
with the UAE would have commercial benefits for both countries.
Japan in particular has been looking overseas to maintain
the viability of its own nuclear power plant makers -- Hitachi/GE,
Mitsubishi Heavy Industry, and Toshiba -- at a time when ambitious
plans for domestic expansion are meeting with increasing skepticism
from the general public. With sluggish economic growth and
a declining population, growth in Japan’s electricity
demand has been the lowest in East Asia. This was underlined
by a 2007 report from the Japan Electric Power Survey Committee,
a body which includes utilities such as TEPCO and manufacturers
like Hitachi. It projected that domestic electricity demand
will increase by only 0.9% per annum to March 2017, a fall
from average annual demand growth of 1.7% in the decade to
March 2006. It cited increasing energy conservation as a further
contributing factor to the declining growth rate. (Reuters,
“Japan Electricity Demand Growth to Slow: Study,”
March 6, 2007.)
Such a prognosis has prompted
the government to assist Japan’s nuclear industry to
secure contracts in Asia where surging power demand is creating
new opportunities for nuclear firms. Officially codified in
August 2006 when the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
(METI) released its Nuclear Power National Plan to “actively
support the global development of the Japanese nuclear industry,”
this approach coincides with increasing domestic concerns
over the industry’s patchy safety record. In 2008 Japan’s
Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) established its
International Nuclear Power Safety Working Group to stimulate
cooperation with emerging nuclear markets, mostly in Asia,
in the face of increasing competition from South Korea and
Russia.
Agreements with several governments
have since followed, including a deal in May 2009 with Russia,
which provides for the transfer of Japanese technology overseas
and the sale of raw nuclear materials to Japan. Uzbekistan
has also signed deals in 2009 with a couple of Japanese firms
for uranium extraction, whilst Japan opened a major uranium
mine in Kazakhstan in April 2009. Indeed, Tokyo sees nuclear
power as one area in which it still has a competitive advantage
over most of its rivals, and therefore nuclear cooperation
is one arena in which Japan can exercise a degree of leadership
and vision, particularly in Asia.
Until the early 1990s, however,
the Japanese nuclear industry maintained a largely domestic
focus, aside from uranium exploration and mine investment
in Australia and Canada. Since then, Japan’s three nuclear
power plant makers have expanded overseas via acquisitions
of and alliances with foreign nuclear companies. For example,
General Electric and Hitachi merged their nuclear energy operations
in July 2007, a year after Toshiba purchased American reactor
builder Westinghouse from British Nuclear Fuels.
As well as pushing for overseas
expansion, Tokyo has spent much of this decade promoting the
nuclear option domestically, despite stagnant electricity
demand and safety scandals. A new Energy Policy Law of June
2002 consolidated greater government control over energy infrastructure,
and also aimed to decrease dependence on fossil fuels. In
November that same year it was announced that a tax on coal
would join those already charged on other fossil fuels, and
would be accompanied by a 15.7% reduction in development taxes
which apply to nuclear power generation. The reasoning was
twofold: to diversify Japan’s energy supplies and simultaneously
reduce carbon emissions under the Kyoto Protocol, both of
which feed into an enhanced role for nuclear power. In 2008
the METI subsequently predicted that nuclear’s share
would reach 41.5% of total capacity by 2017, despite the forced
shut down of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in
July 2007 which accounted for a decline in nuclear’s
share to 26% in 2007. (World Nuclear Association, “Nuclear
Power in Japan,” May 2009).
Kashiwazaki-Kariwa was just
one of a series of accidents and scandals that have shattered
public confidence in nuclear power in Japan. These have included
two fatal accidents: at Tokaimura in 1999, when poorly trained
workers caused an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction, releasing
radiation which killed two staff and forced the evacuation
of thousands of local residents; and at Mihama in 2004 when
super-heated steam leaked through a hole in a pipe that feeds
the plant’s turbine facility, killing four and injuring
seven others at the facility. These disasters revealed a cover-up
culture in which employees’ loyalty to their companies
permitted lax safety measures to go unchallenged. (Further
examples include a 2002 scandal over widespread data falsification
at TEPCO’s nuclear power plants. The utility firm had
falsified inspection records when trying to hide cracks in
reactor shrouds in 13 of its 17 reactors. The World Nuclear
Industry Status Report 2007.) As a result, the Japanese government
has enforced stricter controls under a reorganised structure
of agencies responsible for overseeing nuclear power. Nevertheless,
these could not prevent the enforced shut down of TEPCO’s
Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in the wake of the Niigata Chuetsu-Oki
earthquake which was stronger than the plant was designed
for. It remained completely off line for almost twenty-two
months although an IAEA inspection concluded it suffered “no
significant damage.” After seismic upgrades, in February
2009 Japan’s Nuclear Safety Commission (NSC) agreed
that one unit (unit 7) could be restarted on a trial basis,
which began on May 9, 2009, for fifty days of testing.
In order to spur domestic
consumption and capitalise on new export markets, the ruling
Liberal Democratic Party has stressed the need for Japan to
become a world leader in the new generation of fast breeder
reactors (FBRs). Mitsubishi was subsequently chosen in April
2007 to spearhead this ambitious scheme. There are not many
countries that can afford, either technically or financially,
the kind of advanced nuclear reactors that the Japanese and
other consortia are offering. The UAE is a perfect new market
for advanced nuclear power plant makers. How Japan manages
its existing reactors, as well as its development of new reactors,
will be watched very closely by those in the market for civilian
nuclear technology.
Setting an Example
Another reason for Western
and Japanese support has been the UAE commitment to a strictly
civilian nuclear programme. Indeed, the UAE has been lauded
as setting a good example to would-be nuclear powers in West
Asia, such as Iran, due to its decision not to enrich uranium
or to reprocess spent fuel. For the West, the sale of civilian
nuclear technologies to the UAE is also a response to Iranian
accusations of ‘double standards’ in denying the
benefits of peaceful energy technology to other states. Iranian
government officials have thus called these efforts ‘nuclear
apartheid,’ whereby just a privileged few states (chiefly
the five permanent members of the United Nations Security
Council) have the right to develop nuclear technology whilst
denying other states the same right. Such critics contend
that these privileged states hypocritically allow only their
allies to acquire nuclear technology.
The deal is also considered
a standard bearer for other regional states, in particular
Egypt, keen to develop their own nuclear schemes. Supporters
of the UAE’s programme hope it will constitute a basis
for enhanced regional cooperation in areas such as electricity
sharing and human resources as well as transparency in regulatory
oversight.
The sale of nuclear technology
would undoubtedly strengthen the strategic interests between
the contracting country and the Emirates. Indeed, all five
powers see their respective nuclear cooperation agreements
as consolidating a key security relationship in West Asia.
For instance, the UAE hosts more than two thousand US military
personnel, and more American naval ships visit the UAE than
any other overseas destination. The US Air Force also operates
the Al Dhafra Air Base and both countries share intelligence.
In addition to such logistical
support, the UAE military is part of the NATO mission to Afghanistan
and a valuable customer for American defence contractors.
In September 2008, Congress was informed of the proposed sale
to the UAE of the Theatre High Altitude Air Defence (THAAD)
system, plus the Patriot PAC-3 and AMRAM missiles, in an arms
deal worth an estimated US$6.95 billion. In February 2009
it was announced that the UAE was also buying 224 AIM-120C-7
advanced air-to-air missiles for its F-16 jets from American
arms manufacturer Raytheon. In the same month, American firms
Boeing and Lockheed Martin also secured contracts worth US$2.8
billion from the Emirates for military transport planes. These
deals were part of a US$5 billion buying spree the Emirati
government conducted at the 2009 IDEX (International Defence
Exhibition) in Abu Dhabi, one of the world’s biggest
arms fairs. (Stanley Carvalho, “Iran Neighbour UAE Spends
$5 bln on Arms Deals,” Reuters, February 26,
2009.)
Whilst keen to support the
UAE politically and militarily, all four major players are
intent on ensuring that civilian nuclear programmes will not
result in regional nuclear proliferation. Tokyo has been among
the staunchest supporters of reinforcing nuclear non-proliferation
measures. The revelations that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq
was secretly developing nuclear weapons prior to the Gulf
War of 1990 were deeply shocking. His July 1990 threat to
attack Israel with chemical weapons prompted Israel to hint
at a nuclear response, raising the spectre of nuclear conflict
in West Asia. It is now believed that an Iranian nuclear weapons
capability would escalate tensions in West Asia again, alter
the regional balance of power, and even precipitate the collapse
of the whole non-proliferation regime.
Iran’s nuclear programme
is controversial chiefly because of Tehran’s reluctance
to divulge details of its enrichment and reprocessing activities
to the IAEA. It is widely believed that Iran had a nuclear
weapons programme until 2003, which now lies dormant, but
the IAEA has yet to unearth any concrete evidence that Iran
has redirected nuclear material for weapons use. Nevertheless,
in February 2006, Tehran’s lack of cooperation with
the IAEA was enough for the United Nations Security Council
to levy wide-ranging sanctions after Iran refused to suspend
enrichment. Tehran maintains that it has only enriched uranium
to less than 5%, just enough to fuel a nuclear power plant,
and has vehemently protested the sanctions.
In order to assuage fears
of nuclear proliferation in West Asia therefore, the UAE has
contracted American firm Thorium Power to help establish a
fully independent Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation
(FANR), reporting to a senior American regulator. Proponents
argue that cooperation with the UAE is a major boost for global
non-proliferation as many countries increasingly look to nuclear
energy to reduce carbon emissions whilst simultaneously expanding
their power grids. As such it might even breathe new life
into the ailing NPT regime, although this is by no means assured
as other states are yet to commit to the same kind of regulation
as the UAE. Whilst some, such as Bahrain, have shown no interest
in enrichment and reprocessing technologies, others in West
Asia may prefer to keep their options open.
Nevertheless, with around
forty developing countries, eleven in the Middle East, expressing
an interest in harnessing civilian nuclear power, there is
some unease about the prospect of nuclear arms proliferation.
Indeed, opponents such as European Renewable Energy Council
Policy Director Oliver Schafer argue that it is “impossible”
to completely prevent dual use of civil nuclear technology.
He argues that, “When it comes to building reactors
in more unsafe regions with more terrorism, proliferation
is definitely an issue.” (Dominic Moran, “The
UAE Nuclear Debate,” International Relations and
Security Network (ISN), March 6, 2009.) Opponents also
fear that the deal may spark increased nuclear development
in West Asia, as other regional powers take advantage of the
weakness of the NPT. This perception assumes that other regional
players would follow a different route to the UAE.
Moreover, Dubai was tainted
by its implication in the A. Q. Khan illicit nuclear network
whose customers included Iran, Libya, North Korea, and Saddam
Hussein’s Iraq. Khan’s office in Dubai played
a key role, from where smuggled nuclear materials were shipped
to Iraq and Libya. The UAE’s commitment to total transparency
in its nuclear quest has been driven partly by the need to
strengthen its relations with the US and other powers following
this lapse. Ben Rhode, an analyst at the International Institute
for Strategic Studies, noted that, “Abu Dhabi has been
keen for Dubai to clean up its act. And they put in an export
control law. If you are an Iranian expat living in the UAE
it is a lot harder to set up these businesses or to open a
bank account.” However, Rhode also states that certain
individuals are able to circumvent the rules. (Dominic Moran,
“The UAE Nuclear Debate,” International Relations
and Security Network (ISN), March 6, 2009.) Indeed, more
recently the US Congress has become aware of transshipments
to Iran through the UAE of militarily useful technology. These
have apparently included computer chips supplied by Iran and
used in the homemade bombs of Iraqi insurgents which target
American and Coalition troops.
Indeed, the proliferation
debate is at the centre of the controversy over the UAE’s
nuclear programme. Traditionally, it has enjoyed better relations
with Tehran than many of its GCC neighbours and Iran is one
of its major trading partners. For instance, the Jebel Ali
Free Zone in Dubai is Iran’s largest source of foreign
commodities and consumables servicing its growing middle class,
and around 200,000 Iranians presently live in the emirate.
Furthermore, approximately half of the refined gasoline consumed
in Iran is also transshipped through the UAE. Hardliners in
Congress believe the US and its allies should use leverage
over the UAE’s nuclear programme to threaten to block
these imports unless Iran changes its confrontational stance
towards the US and its allies. (Henry Sokolski, “Nuclear
Cooperation with the UAE?” National Review,
December 15, 2008.) In the last few years, however, the Emirates
have made numerous entreaties to Iran to abstain from nuclear
weapons development, and its nascent nuclear programme is
designed in part to persuade Tehran to follow a similar path
of non-enrichment.
Indeed, the bilateral relationship
has been put under increasing strain in recent years over
the development of Iran’s Bushehr reactor and Natanz
enrichment facility. These ties suffered a further blow with
Tehran’s 2008 decision to station maritime personnel
on the Persian Gulf island of Abu Musa, reigniting an old
territorial dispute between the two states. Abu Musa is very
close to vital shipping lanes. Fears of the militarisation
of the Iranian nuclear program; Tehran’s naval exercises
and missile testing; and its support for militancy in Iraq,
Lebanon, and the Palestinian Territories are all a cause for
concern around the Gulf. These fears were further stoked when
Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards took control of the
Strait of Hormuz in September 2008. This has allowed the Guards
to wield greater power than at any point since the Islamic
Revolution’s early days.
Other motivations for nuclear
diplomacy with the UAE exist. Nuclear cooperation agreements
are a ‘good news story’ which enable the parties
involved to portray a positive image in the Middle East, without
any reference to Palestine or Israel. Indeed, Sarkozy has
even stated that extending nuclear cooperation to Muslim countries
could help prevent Huntington’s clash of civilisations
prophecy. (See Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations:
And the Remaking of World Order, Pocket Books, 1998.
Its main thesis is that tensions between cultural and religious
identities will be the chief driver of conflict in the post-Cold
War world.) Nuclear also represents a practical option to
reduce greenhouse emissions whilst retaining access to energy.
Conclusion
The UAE’s commitment
to transparency in its nuclear quest has attracted widespread
international support. This is because it has stressed that
it will not enrich uranium itself but import nuclear fuel
for its plants. These supplies will not only come from a foreign
partner, but the UAE will also return all spent nuclear fuel
rather than reprocess it.
For Japan and the other prospective
contractors, there are at least three main motivating factors.
Firstly, Japan in particular is heavily dependent on oil supplies
from the UAE and other GCC members. To this end, it has been
trying to tie both the GCC as a grouping and the UAE individually
into an FTA in which stable oil and gas supplies would be
guaranteed. Tokyo is therefore hoping that nuclear cooperation
with the UAE will have a positive spillover effect into stable
and secure oil supplies. Secondly, the Japanese nuclear industry
is keen to develop new markets, especially one as potentially
lucrative as the UAE’s. There are not many countries
that can afford, either technically or financially, the kind
of advanced nuclear reactors that the various consortia are
offering. Consequently, foreign nuclear firms will be looking
to the UAE for signs that new markets are economically and
politically viable in other GCC member states. Thirdly, it
is hoped that the UAE’s nuclear programme will set new
standards of transparency and regulatory rigour, thus setting
an example to close neighbour Iran and other potential nuclear
power developers in West Asia. As such it might even breathe
new life into the ailing NPT regime, although this is by no
means assured as the other interested states are yet to commit
to the same kind of regulation as the UAE.
The UAE’s nuclear programme
will be watched closely for other reasons too. Many governments
will be waiting to see if any change of tone or policy is
forthcoming from Iran’s leadership over its own nuclear
programme. These same observers will also be interested to
see if the UAE’s decision to reject uranium enrichment
and reprocessing will influence other potential developers
of nuclear power in West Asia and North Africa to follow a
similar path.
As with other aspects of foreign
policy towards West Asia, such as Iran and the Palestine issue,
Tokyo has closely followed the American lead regarding nuclear
power for the UAE. However, Tokyo views nuclear power as an
area in which it still holds a competitive advantage over
most of its rivals, and nuclear cooperation is seen as an
arena in which Japan can exercise a degree of leadership and
vision, particularly in Asia. The UAE deal is one step forward.
It remains to be seen, however, if Tokyo will conclude similar
deals with other members of the GCC, all of whom have signaled
their interest in nuclear power. Like the UAE, Bahrain has
also disavowed enrichment and reprocessing. Likewise, Japan’s
ties with Qatar are drawing closer due to that country’s
huge natural gas reserves. Nevertheless, established practice
points to Japan once again waiting until the US or other Western
powers make the first substantive move before signing a comprehensive
nuclear cooperation agreement with another GCC state. In this
sense, the various deals the UAE has concluded contain significantly
more substance than its neighbours’ bilateral nuclear
cooperation agreements.
Naturally, the UAE has its
own interests in developing a civilian nuclear programme.
Nuclear power will increase the sustainability of its oil
and gas reserves, simultaneously allowing more of these resources
to be exported, thus boosting earnings. The UAE and the other
five members of the GCC rely exclusively on fossil fuels for
electricity generation, and water desalination also consumes
large qualities of oil and gas. Rising living standards, population,
and infrastructure requires ever greater electricity and desalination
capacity which the UAE wants nuclear power to meet, whilst
maintaining economic growth by exporting its natural resources.
In addition to these economic
benefits, the UAE has political aspirations for its nuclear
programme. It is not alone among Arab states concerned that
Iran’s nuclear programme could result in regional nuclear
proliferation. Therefore, the UAE’s own nuclear plans
constitute a direct appeal to Iran to demonstrate greater
nuclear transparency. In recent years the traditionally close
UAE-Iran relationship has been strained by the development
of Iran’s Bushehr reactor and Natanz enrichment facility.
These ties suffered a further blow with Tehran’s 2008
decision to station navy personnel on the Persian Gulf island
of Abu Musa, reigniting an old territorial dispute between
the two states. Nevertheless, the UAE’s plans could
backfire as its significant arms spending is likely to further
strain bilateral relations, as might its nuclear engagement
with some of Iran’s fiercest critics.