In the international relations literature, the absolute sovereignty of the state has been questioned, especially since the second half of the 20th century. Although realist theory positions the state as the main actor of the international system, liberal and neo-Marxist approaches have drawn attention to the increasing role of non-state actors, especially supranational corporations. Today, this trend has become more visible, especially through issues such as energy security, climate change and high-tech investments. New Hegemony in the Nuclear Industry: The Rising Power of Non-State Actors.[1] A field such as nuclear energy, which requires a high level of technology and capital, has traditionally been developed under state control. However, this picture has started to change in the 21st century. Many multinational technology companies (e.g. Microsoft, Meta, Google), primarily based in the United States of America (USA), have started to invest directly in nuclear energy, and these companies have become not only economic but also geostrategic actors.[2]
Nuclear energy began to be integrated into the international energy system in the 1950s when the first commercial reactors began operating. Today, some 440 reactors provide around 9% of the world’s electricity. More importantly, nuclear power has become a strategic tool in the fight against climate change, accounting for about a quarter of low-carbon energy production.[3]
Nuclear technology is achieved by controlling the energy generated by the fission of the atomic nuclei of elements such as uranium and thorium. This technology was first developed for military purposes during the Second World War, but its peaceful use has come to the fore since the 1950s. In the international literature, Joseph Nye’s “complex interdependence” approach explains how nuclear energy has become a tool not only for energy production but also for diplomatic and strategic cooperation.
Today, civilian nuclear power plants operating in 31 countries have become a fundamental element in global energy security, with a total operating experience of nearly 20,000 reactor-years. Moreover, many countries, particularly in Europe, consume nuclear-generated electricity through regional grids. This shows that nuclear energy is a power source with transboundary effects.[4] On the other hand, nuclear energy is not limited to energy production; it has become indispensable in many fields such as medicine, industry, agriculture and space exploration. This shows that nuclear technologies are positioned at the center of sustainable development. Scholars working on nuclear security, such as Matthew Bunn[5] and Scott Sagan, have emphasized that these technologies also carry serious political responsibilities.
As Bunn emphasized, the future of nuclear energy is not only a matter of technical capacity, but also an area where corporate responsibility, transparency and security systems are integrated. Bunn argued that deeper involvement of the private sector is essential for the safety of nuclear materials, and that it is critical not only for the security of energy supply but also for global stability that transnational companies operating in areas such as the construction of nuclear facilities and the fuel cycle work in harmony with international inspection regimes.[6]
Furthermore, Sagan’s (1996) “Why States Produce Nuclear Weapons” explains strategic motivations along three theoretical axes. These are security, status and bureaucratic processes. This framework can also be adapted to corporate nuclear investment strategies:[7]
- Security: States provide strategic protection with nuclear power. Similarly, technology firms guarantee security of energy supply through nuclear power agreements. Meta’s long-term agreement with the Clinton plant, for example, has served as a strategic defense for the uninterrupted operation of data centers.
- Status: According to Sagan, the acquisition of nuclear weapons provides social prestige. In this parallel, large corporations have invested in nuclear energy to gain an image of high-tech and sustainable leadership. Amazon’s SMR investment or Google’s modular reactor partnership are concrete manifestations of this corporate quest for status.
- Bureaucratic Processes: In the internal dynamics of states, nuclear projects show the influence of bureaucratic structures. The entry of the private sector has had a first-hand impact on this internal bureaucracy, so that the state-private partnership has led to the restructuring of established state institutions.
In this perspective, a space is created where national strategy and corporate interests intersect. Sagan’s state-centered perspective shows that today technology companies are integrated into this system with similar motivations. In fact, these companies have become global actors that shape strategy, prestige and bureaucratic governance models, not just energy providers.
Today, tech giants such as Meta, Amazon, Google and Microsoft are investing in nuclear power plants to meet the growing energy demands of artificial intelligence and data centers. Meta has committed to supply 1.1 gigawatts of energy from Constellation Energy’s Clinton Clean Energy Center in Illinois by June 2027. In this regard, it also serves to protect nuclear infrastructure by contributing to the relicensing of the facility.[8]
These developments redefine the concept of “energy diplomacy”. Tannenwald’s nuclear norms approach argued that nuclear technologies can be used not only for war but also as a tool for peaceful development and international legitimization. Today, the technological giants’ nuclear orientation is considered a strategic choice not only in terms of environmental sustainability but also geopolitical positioning.[9]
Washington has also taken steps to shape the future of nuclear energy. By 2025, the goal is to increase existing nuclear capacity to 400 gigawatts by 2050, with policies prioritizing next-generation technologies such as small modular reactors (SMRs). These goals are not only transforming energy production, but also the nature of geostrategic competition. Indeed, the commercialization of nuclear technology and the integration of the private sector into R&D processes create vulnerabilities not only for energy policies but also for the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) regime. The main risk here is the construction of a system of energy geopolitics in which state control is reduced and regulation is determined by corporate lobbies. In this case, the international nuclear regime is likely to face not only a technical but also a normative crisis.
As a result, the activity of transnational corporations in the field of nuclear energy erodes the classical state-centered understanding of international relations and constructs a multi-layered balance of power. In this context, the future of the international system depends not only on the rational choices of states but also on the technical and political ecosystem shaped by corporations in line with their economic interests. Such a transformation will not only affect energy policies; it will necessitate the redefinition of fundamental concepts such as sovereignty, security and international law. The energy security of the future will depend not only on the diplomatic skills of states, but also on the transparency and responsibility of companies and the construction of a governance model that prioritizes the public interest.
[1] “Meta signs 20-year nuclear power deal as tech giants continue AI-driven energy push”, New York Post, https://nypost.com/2025/06/03/business/meta-signs-20-year-nuclear-power-plant-deal-to-power-ai/, (Date of Access: 04.06.2025).
[2] “Amazon, Google, Meta Among Companies Backing Effort to Triple Nuclear Production”, Investopedia, https://www.investopedia.com/amazon-google-meta-among-companies-backing-effort-to-triple-nuclear-production-11695294, (Date of Access: 04.06.2025).
[3]“Nuclear Power in the World Today”, World Nuclear Association, https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/nuclear-power-in-the-world-today, (Date of Access: 04.06.2025).
[4] Ibid.
[5]“Reducing nuclear dangers”, Science, https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adr0532, (Date of Access: 04.06.2025).
[6] Ibid.
[7] “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?: Three Models in Search of a Bomb”, JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539273, (Date of Access: 04.06.2025).
[8] “Meta signs 20-year nuclear power deal as tech giants continue AI-driven energy push”, New York Post, https://nypost.com/2025/06/03/business/meta-signs-20-year-nuclear-power-plant-deal-to-power-ai/, (Date of Access: 04.06.2025).
[9]“International Norms, Nuclear Taboo, and the Risk of Use of Nuclear Weapons”, VCDNP, https://vcdnp.org/international-norms-nuclear-taboo-and-the-risk-of-use-of-nuclear-weapons, (Date of Access: 04.06.2025).
