Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)

As part of a push for expansion of renewable energy in Indonesia, the government plans to rollout ten thousand megawatts of nuclear power by 2040. Malaysia’s thirteenth national plan revives nuclear energy as part of Malaysia’s net-zero commitment, although specific targets will be determined through future study. In 2022 the Philippines mentioned plans to add nuclear power back into the national power mix. In September of 2025, the government established the Philippine Atomic Energy Regulatory Authority (PhilATOM) as the country’s independent nuclear regulator. PhilATOM will oversee all nuclear and radiation-related activities, ensuring that all aspects of nuclear energy infrastructure from siting through to licensing and operation are peaceful, safe, and secure. In 2024, Thailand added six hundred megawatts of SMRS back into its draft PDP. And in April 2025, Vietnam approved the latest iteration of its PDP to include between four thousand to six thousand megawatts of nuclear power by 2053 and eight thousand megawatts of nuclear power by 2050.

These new plans will need significant regulatory, educational, and investment efforts to ensure their success. Many countries in the region slowed or halted training programs for the nuclear field. Vietnam has already identified a need to rapidly rebuild its educational and training pipeline for the technical, regulatory, and policy experts in nuclear energy that will be needed in order to support its planned nuclear plant coming online in 2030.

Before construction decisions can be made, governments must decide what type of reactors they plan to deploy. Many Southeast Asian states are reviewing small modular and advanced reactor designs. However, most of these technologies remain in early stages of licensing and commercial deployment. Of one hundred and twenty-seven SMR designs under consideration globally, only Russia and China have operational SMRs. Key issues remain regarding fuel supply chains, waste management pathways, long-term security and safeguards requirements, and total lifecycle cost.

These energy choices are further shaped by geopolitics: Major nuclear suppliers including Russia, China, South Korea, France, and the U.S. offer distinct reactor technologies, financing models, training programs, political expectations, and deployment timelines. Russia offers a comprehensive “build-own-operate” package that is attractive to many countries considering nuclear power and will even remove spent nuclear fuel, which is often a politically charged issue for governments and communities to deal with. The U.S. meanwhile is racing to reignite its domestic civil nuclear power sector and reclaim technological and export primacy after ceding the field in recent decades to Russia and China, both of which have the power of the state behind their nuclear industry for a potentially faster turnaround time for initiating these significant projects. Yet, choice of supplier brings with it a “one-hundred-year relationship” of servicing and supply, for better or for worse, and Russia’s unprecedented seizure and occupation of Zaporizhia, Europe’s largest nuclear power plant, during the course of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine may give some governments pause in accepting Moscow strategic leverage over a critical energy asset.

To take advantage of the renewed interest in nuclear power, regional governments and their partners will need to take the time to thoroughly evaluate reactor technologies, negotiate supplier arrangements, and develop the domestic expertise necessary to operate and regulate nuclear power safely and securely. Countries in the region need to start now to invest in sustained workforce development, strengthen regulatory infrastructure, and cultivate a public that is informed on the benefits and risks of nuclear energy and the responsibility that comes with it. A coordinated regional approach to nuclear power could help spread the cost burden and streamline nuclear adoption through joint feasibility studies, shared training centers, and regional safety and security exercises. Ultimately, selecting a nuclear supplier is a long-term strategic decision that must reflect each country’s broader national interests. Countries will need to weigh carefully the technical, financial, and geopolitical implications of different nuclear suppliers before making long-term commitments with lasting consequences.