But the latest is that the International Atomic Energy Agency have gave the green-light for Thailand to have nuclear power plants-according to a local press.
But to summarize, Thai Intel’s analysis: Thai politics is very radical and nationalistic-with little democracy, justice and liberty to provide a counter-balance to its radicalism. Add to that a deep knowledge of nuclear physics by Thai scientist and a relatively rich country-and a Thai military with track record of killing protesters and refusing to acknowledge global concerns over its repressions-all of that spells a potential Thai military going hay-wire with nuclear weapons ambition.
Thailand’s current bahavior in the Thai-Cambodia conflict-should serve as a warning to all national security experts.
The following is from the USA War College:
Edited by Mr. Henry D. Sokolski.
When security and arms control analysts list what has helped keep nuclear weapons technologies from spreading, energy economics is rarely, if ever, mentioned. Yet, large civilian nuclear energy programs can—and have—brought states quite a way towards developing nuclear weapons; and it has been market economics, more than any other force, that has kept most states from starting or completing these programs.
Since the early 1950s, every major government in the Western Hemisphere, Asia, the Middle East, and Europe has been drawn to atomic power’s allure, only to have market realities prevent most of their nuclear investment plans from being fully realized. Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand, then, could well determine just how far civilian nuclear energy expands and how much attention its attendant security risks will receive.
Certainly, if nuclear power’s economics remain negative, diplomats and policymakers could leverage this point, work to limit legitimate nuclear commerce to what is economically competitive, and so gain a powerful tool to help limit nuclear proliferation. If nuclear power finally breaks from its past and becomes the cheapest of clean technologies in market competitions against its alternatives, though, it is unlikely that diplomats and policymakers will be anywhere near as able or willing to prevent insecure or hostile states from developing nuclear energy programs, even if these programs help them make atomic weapons.
Will the global spread of nuclear power programs, which could bring many more countries much closer to acquiring nuclear weapons capabilities, be an inevitable consequence of energy market economics? Or is such an expansion impossible without government subsidies and new policies to support them? This volume showcases the analyses of some of the world’s leading energy experts to shed light on this key 21st century security issue.
- POSITION: Thailand must not be allowed to have nuclear power plants with Burma’s nuclear weapons ambition up-date (thaiintelligentnews.wordpress.com)
- Ministers are breaking their promise on subsidies for nuclear power (leftfootforward.org)
- Carnival of nuclear energy 39 (nextbigfuture.com)
- POSITION: The Globe “Must Not Trust” Thailand’s prime Minister, “Who Lies” about Nuclear Weapons, with Nuclear Plants (thaiintelligentnews.wordpress.com)
- China enters race to develop nuclear energy from thorium | Duncan Clark (guardian.co.uk)
- World nuclear generation in 2010 probably about 2630 TWH (nextbigfuture.com)
- “Egypt and Nuclear Weapons” and related posts (phronesisaical.blogspot.com)
- Toshiba may hold talks with a Russian firm over sales of Uranium (risingsunofnihon.com)