Egypt moves to develop nuclear power

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak announced the revival of Egypt’s nuclear program last week in order to meet rising energy demands. Mubarak said that Egypt would seek aid for their nuclear project from the U.N. and the United States, which already gives over $2 billion each year in economic assistance. U.S. State Department spokesman, Sean McCormack, said the U.S. does not object to Egypt’s nuclear aspirations as long as they stick to International Atomic Energy Agency guidelines. The U.S recently put economic sanctions on Iran because of their nuclear program.

The Kaimin sits down with the former deputy ambassador to Egypt, Mark Johnson, to see why Egypt’s nuclear program is being treated differently than Iran’s.

Kaimin: How will Mubarak’s decision to revive Egypt’s nuclear program affect Egypt’s long-term stability?

Johnson: Egypt is a large-area country but is relatively poor. Most of its energy comes from either hydropower from the Nile or from oil and gas. Egyptians have known for a long time that the oil and gas deposits would decline, and that is, in fact, happening. So as long ago as 20 years, Egypt had plans to develop nuclear energy. On many levels, this is the way to go, it’s non-polluting, it minimizes the impact on oil and gas reserves. The plans (to build nuclear power plants) were first announced last year. The son of the president, Gamal Mubarak, told a packed room that Egypt would relaunch its nuclear program. That got a round of applause – it was a popular announcement. The projection is that oil and gas reserves will deplete in about 20 years. To develop nuclear energy you’re going to have to have a leave time. It takes a long time to build, properly and safely, a nuclear plant. So what President Mubarak said three or four days ago is, in fact, a continuation of the Egyptian policy decision last year. It is intended for peaceful uses. Egypt is a member of the non-proliferation treaty. All of their public statements indicate that they will observe that and peaceful uses are what they intend. So, on an economic level, it makes sense. Oil and gas are declining; they have a high level of growth, which they have worked very hard to achieve. In order to generate enough electricity and in order to keep economic growth going along, they need to have reliable sources of power.

Kaimin: How is the nuclear program in Egypt different from the one in Iran?

Johnson: Before I answer that, I have to make a sharp political distinction. Egypt has maintained peaceful relations. There is a vast political difference between those two countries that is important to note. Iran has had long-standing plans to develop civilian non-weapon nuclear energy. It goes back to the time that the shah of Iran was in power. The shah reasoned, much like the Egyptians are reasoning, that Iran needed to develop a reliable source of power that was not oil or gas.  He could see the future, and in a sense he was correct. Those plans were launched in the mid-1970s. Initially, The Islamic Republic of Iran did not seek to pursue a peaceful nuclear program, but in the year 2002, the world were stunned to realize that Iran had been developing clandestinely, secretly, a major program that would produce uranium of weapons-grade quality. And so, similarities are that both countries have ambitions to develop nuclear reactors that will be used for the generation of power. But in the case of Iran, they now have up to four ways of developing this highly radioactive weapons-grade material. They are making it to put it in bombs, quite simply. So there is the sharp political difference between Egypt and Iran and there is a difference in where they each seem to be going in their development of nuclear plants.

Kaimin: Why does the U.S. seem to support Egypt’s decision to create a nuclear program while denouncing Iran’s decision to create one?

Johnson: One of the reasons is that Egypt’s stated policy is to develop – which is consistent with its obligations with the non-proliferation treaty – a peaceful civilian economic-use nuclear facility. That is not the case with Iran; the world knows that they have been lying. So the U.S. said they would be willing to work with Egypt.

Kaimin: Are there global risks of Egypt having their own nuclear program and if so, what are they?

Johnson: There are two kinds of risks. There are always technical risks with a nuclear facility. That is probably one of the main criticisms against the development of nuclear power. When an accident occurs, they can spew out dangerous radiation. There is also the problem of what to do with the radioactive material after you have used it in the generation power. That’s the technical issue dealing with safety and sighting, but there is also a political question that you can’t ignore. That is, is it an accident that as the rhetoric became more inflammatory from Iran, is it just a mere coincidence that the Egyptians made this announcement? Is it an accident that the Jordanians made a similar announcement not too long ago? One of the reasons why I think Gamal received such a round of applause is that this is Egypt’s way of showing that they are a major player in the region. For the Iranians, it was clear that having a nuclear plant was a source of national pride, and in the polls, (the Iranian) people have generally supported it. On paper, Egypt has a legitimate case on developing nuclear power. But I wonder, and only personally speculate, if there is a correlation between Iran’s apocalyptical letter coming out in the last couple of years and now Egypt’s announcement to develop a nuclear capacity.

Kaimin: Is it a good idea for Egypt to build nuclear power plants?

Johnson: They certainly make a plausible case. Their oil and gas resources are declining. They have put a lot of effort into retaining growth rates of 6 to 7 percent. I think there is another calculation that goes on among the Egyptians, the current government I am talking about now. One of the valid criticisms that has been made by opponents to the Mubarak government is that it is a corrupt government and it is not creating economic benefits for the citizens.

Kaimin: You mentioned that other countries were developing nuclear programs as well. Is this in response to Iran’s apocalyptic rhetoric?

Johnson: It may or may not. No one has stated it in the way I am stating it. I have been in the room with senior Egyptian officials, met Mubarak and heard him speak, and I have never heard them say the reason they are doing this because Iran is doing this. That’s a speculation on my part. But if we continue our analysis of the Middle East, we have the emergence of a more powerful Iran, not only within Iraq, but also in Lebanon, in Gaza with Hamas, and Iran is Persian. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan are Sunni by and large. Iraq is Shia, so there are all kinds of old festering tensions that have come up and risen. So I suspect the Arab Sunnis calculate they have to be aware of the threat from Iran, and maybe that is why they are making these announcements at this time. But I am not saying – and I can’t say, because I don’t know – that they intend to move any further beyond a civilian use of nuclear energy.