“Kazakhstan, which is second only to Australia in uranium reserves and exceptionally appealing to nuclear nations that require uranium, has entered into agreements or joint ventures with many countries and corporations,” a new analysis (pdf) from the DNI Open Source Center observes.
Kazakhstan has embarked on cooperative civilian nuclear projects with countries including the U.S., Russia, China, Brazil, Canada, France, India, and others, possibly including Iran.
“Some serious issues lurk behind the veneer of the government’s political and commercial success,” the OSC analysis says. These include “an unclear line of power succession,… which could facilitate nuclear deals with international partners with mixed proliferation records.”
“The country is corrupt and has corrupt practices,” the OSC declares. “Kazakhstan’s mineral riches have supplied many a thief with wealth.” See “Kazakhstan — Opening Up for Nuclear Collaboration,” Open Source Center, October 6, 2009.
Kazakhstan relinquished the nuclear weapons that it inherited from the former Soviet Union in 1995. It has also accepted IAEA safeguards and the Additional Protocol.
Update: A Kazakhstan government official disputed the conclusions of the OSC analysis. He said that “contrary to recent reports, his country is not looking to do nuclear deals with countries that have a mixed record on proliferation,” the Christian Science Monitor reported October 19.
A deeper understanding of methane could help scientists better address these impacts – including potentially through methane removal.
While it is reasonable for governments to keep the most sensitive aspects of nuclear policies secret, the rights of their citizens to have access to general knowledge about these issues is equally valid so they may know about the consequences to themselves and their country.
Advancing the U.S. leadership in emerging biotechnology is a strategic imperative, one that will shape regional development within the U.S., economic competitiveness abroad, and our national security for decades to come.
Inconsistent metrics and opaque reporting make future AI power‑demand estimates extremely uncertain, leaving grid planners in the dark and climate targets on the line