Russia’s experience was without any doubt used in setting up the new low-enriched uranium bank, although the centers in Angarsk and in Ust-Kamenogorsk differ significantly both in the technologies used and in their legal status.
But it is not the matter of the project’s engineering solutions or legal technicalities. This initiative was implemented in a drastically different international climate, in a different system of political coordinates.
Since 2010, the global situation has changed radically and, unfortunately, it has not been a change for the best. Hopes pinned on a “reset” of Russia–U.S. relations have not panned out. The arms – and nuclear weapons – race has accelerated. And the problem of nuclear proliferation has become worse, as highlighted once again by the grave Korean peninsula crisis.
Under these circumstances, deep pessimism and the darkest prophecy have become the hot trend in discussing international security issues. Politicians, experts, journalists and diplomats strive to outdo each other in painting the grimmest picture of the impending upheavals. And, of course, the “inevitable” proliferation of nuclear weapons is an integral part of the picture.
Yet the event that took place in Ust-Kamenogorsk on Aug. 29 shows otherwise.
There are still politicians and public leaders in this world who are not only prepared to go against the global flow, but are also capable of reversing it.