An analysis of the Uranium One deal and the New START Treaty, and their unforeseen impact on America's nuclear future.
The 2010 acquisition of Canadian company Uranium One by Russia's Rosatom was a low-profile deal approved by multiple U.S. agencies. It controlled access to 20% of U.S. uranium *mining licenses*, a critical distinction from physical uranium. Years later, it was reframed into a major political controversy.
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) is comprised of nine government entities. The decision to approve the deal was unanimous, indicating no single agency, including the State Department, could have vetoed it alone. The process confirmed there were no unresolved national security concerns at the time.
In 2010, the U.S. produced only a fraction of the uranium needed to power its nuclear reactors. The Uranium One deal concerned mining rights for a portion of this domestic production, none of which could be exported without a separate and never-granted license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
CFIUS and NRC unanimously approve Rosatom's acquisition of a majority stake in Uranium One. The event receives minimal media coverage.
The book "Clinton Cash" is published, linking donations to the Clinton Foundation from individuals connected to Uranium One with the deal's approval, igniting the political controversy.
Congressional Republicans launch investigations into the deal. Attorney General Jeff Sessions directs DOJ prosecutors to evaluate whether a special counsel is needed.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine prompts a ban on Russian oil imports to the U.S. and initiates a debate on banning Russian uranium, highlighting U.S. dependency on foreign sources.
Signed in 2010, the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) was a landmark arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia. It faced fierce opposition from those who believed it weakened U.S. security, but was ultimately ratified with bipartisan support, seen as essential for strategic stability.
The treaty was ratified by a vote of 71-26, surpassing the required two-thirds majority. The vote demonstrated significant bipartisanship, with 13 Republicans joining all Democrats in support. This support was crucial for its passage.
While seemingly separate, these events highlight a fundamental tension. The U.S. pursued arms reduction with a geopolitical rival while simultaneously becoming more dependent on that same rival (and its allies) for the very material needed to fuel its domestic nuclear energy sector, a key component of its carbon-free energy goals.
By 2022, nearly half of the uranium powering U.S. reactors came from Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan. This dependency creates a strategic vulnerability, as geopolitical events could disrupt supply, threatening U.S. energy security and climate objectives.