Why Nuclear Security Is an Instantly Urgent Matter in Southeast Asia
To most people in Southeast Asia, the issue of nuclear security seemed like a worry for a different day. There was a long-standing focus on the peaceful benefits of nuclear technology in energy generation, healthcare, and industrial applications. However, the shift in focus from effortless benefits to nuclear security is long overdue. As the ASEAN countries are adopting nuclear technology for power generation, research, and healthcare, the risks associated with radiological incidents and the misuses of nuclear materials are increasing.
To Southeast Asia, a new era of nuclear energy spells opportunity. Countries like Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore are gearing up to construct nuclear power plants as part of their energy diversification strategies and carbon emission reduction goals. Projects such as Indonesia’s first nuclear reactor, slated for the early 2030s, and Singapore’s explorations of nuclear power, demonstrate regional ambition. There is a need for greater readiness. Nuclear security is a pressing challenge that, as the tone of this paper suggests, cannot be postponed.
Given the fluid geopolitical context, how prepared is ASEAN to address the evolving nuclear and radiological risks? The answer is promising but offers substantial hurdles.
ASEAN has achieved notable milestones, particularly through collaborative efforts such as ASEANTOM, as well as the incorporation of nuclear security into the ASEAN Regional Forum and the East Asia Summit. Technical collaboration, training, and IAEA-sponsored simulation exercises alongside the United States, Japan, and South Korea have advanced capabilities and facilitated more effective collaboration and information sharing.
Southeast Asia’s nuclear and radioactive regulatory frameworks have critical gaps. Comprehensive Facility Security Assessment (CFSA) regulations have not been endorsed by numerous ASEAN member states, including Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Brunei, creating legal gaps. Disparity in financial means, regulatory authority, and limited governance in some ASEAN nations poses weaknesses that threaten effective regional cohesion and response. ASEAN’s consensus-based decision-making, while beneficial for diplomatic relations, tends to slow critical judgment and action.
ASEAN must act as a whole to address the challenges of cross-border nuclear issues by mobilizing political commitment and reducing fragmented approaches, enhancing investment in ASEAN-wide frameworks, and building structural coalitions to transform the region’s nuclear security from a mere expectation to comprehensive implementation.
How ASEAN Constructs Security: Progress and Potential
Understanding that no nation can combat the threat of nuclear warfare single-handedly, ASEAN has made strides in constructing a regional framework that fosters shared responsibility and enhances collective preparedness.
ASEANTOM, the ASEAN Network of Regulatory Bodies on Atomic Energy, is ASEAN’s nuclear regulatory structure created in 2012. This council functions as a hub for policy coordination, collaboration in technical fields, and the development of safety and security standards. ASEANTOM has strengthened the capacities of member states, especially the newer ones, through nuclear development-focused training, workshops, and rigorous meeting schedules. At the same time, the ARF and EAS have placed nuclear security on a high regional and international agenda vis-à-vis low- and high-level interstate collaboration and policy trust frameworks.
Supported internationally by the IAEA, the US, Japan, South Korea, and the EU, ASEAN has received aid in training, technology transfer, and resource mobilization, particularly in regional workshops on nuclear forensics, radiological emergency preparedness drills, and maritime security exercises designed to combat the smuggling of nuclear materials. These efforts aid ASEAN in building tangible capabilities toward self-sufficiency, contrasting the ASEAN Way. ASEAN’s rigorous acceptance of outside methodologies and frameworks is a primary characteristic of a developing nuclear security culture.
Disparities, Delays, and Dilemmas
These gaps, however, prompt scrutiny and reveal areas that need immediate focus. Not every ASEAN member state has signed up to critical instruments, for example, the CPPNM Amendment. The lack of legal obligations undermines the backbone of a system that ought to be seamlessly interlinked. The gaps are sharp due to the existing disparity in the levels of development, and Singapore and Malaysia have established advanced regulatory frameworks, dedicated institutions, and well-trained personnel, while Cambodia and Laos are still working to establish the bare minimum infrastructure. These gaps may pose challenges in the provision of a coordinated cross-border response during a crisis.
ASEAN’s most cherished principle of consensus, while preserving diplomatic relations, becomes a major barrier to timely and decisive action in the face of immediate nuclear or radiological dangers. The nuclear security gaps will remain vulnerable because of a lack of regional cooperation to address the gaps in implementation, resources, and procedures that need to be streamlined. The risk these gaps pose is that, while real, they are uncontained and have the potential to cause interconnected crises that are catastrophically damaging.
The Way Forward: From Discussions to Concrete Activities
Identifying the issue is merely the beginning; now it is time to take action. ASEAN needs to concentrate on the following three strategic actions:
1. Expedited Ratification and Regulatory Integration
All ASEAN member countries need to urgently ratify and put into action critical nuclear security instruments, especially the CPPNM Amendment. This is legal in nature and goes beyond rhetoric, as it creates legal obligations that establish baseline criteria and build confidence. Regulatory harmonization will address gaps and enhance cross-border cooperation in prevention, detection, and response activities.
2. Formulate ASEAN-Specific Security Norms
Global benchmarks do serve a purpose; however, local contexts and cultural nuances cannot be ignored. ASEAN needs to formulate nuclear security norms to address the region’s challenges and value system, which blends integration and respect for national self-determination. Such a framework would be both ambitious and grounded in reality and would be a powerful platform for collective action.
Invest in Capacity and Partnerships
Technical training, joint exercises, and inclusive knowledge-sharing initiatives all serve to further broaden capacity-building efforts. A regional Center of Excellence can serve both as a training and research hub as well as for ongoing emergency simulation exercises. While multilateral cooperation must continue with the IAEA, the U.S., Japan, and South Korea, ASEAN must devise its own solutions to ensure agility, autonomy, and resilience.
Transforming dialogue into tangible ASEAN actions taken to proactively prevent, detect, and respond to nuclear challenges while safeguarding and promoting regional peace, stability, and enduring prosperity is essential.
Why This Matters for All Southeast Asians
The issue of nuclear security transcends technical and diplomatic boundaries. In the context of Southeast Asia, the issue becomes all the more salient as citizens grapple with questions of public safety, economic well-being, and stability. In a region densely populated and interlinked through trade, a security lapse in one country could trigger a dangerous domino effect. Ensuring the economic, public health, and environmental stability of nuclear materials and facilities is essential to uninterrupted economic activity and is also critical.
ASEAN’s credibility increases on the world stage with strong nuclear security. Strategic partners and investors are attracted to regions with all-encompassing, reliable governance. A solid reputation in security translates to more long-term investment and opportunities in collaboration, spanning science, technology, and defense. This is a shared responsibility involving diplomats, business leaders, academics, civil society, and youths. Long-term resilience hinges on public education, transparency, and the cultivation of future specialists. Nuclear security is an investment for all Southeast Asians, safeguarding and responsibly deploying nuclear technology for the collective benefit.
Conclusion: A Time for Decisive Resolve
Nuclear technology is an integral component of Southeast Asia’s growth. ASEAN is presented a pivotal challenge: to create and maintain a sustainable nuclear security framework that is flexible and all-encompassing. The capacity and commitment gaps, along with the regional boldness to move from formal consensus to ‘collective action,’ are what decide the region’s future.
It is imperative to establish more nuanced and tailored norms that ASEAN is accustomed to and meet international benchmarks. Investment toward sustainability needs to focus on technology and infrastructure, as well as on human capital and institutional resilience. Now is the time for decisive action. A lack of action will lead to Southeast Asia’s nuclear security governance vulnerabilities that are easily exploitable and have tremendous ramifications. On the other hand, decisive and unified action will position the region as a global exemplar for effective nuclear security governance, respecting national sovereignty while embracing collective responsibility.
