Against the background of power shortages, continuously rising prices for oil and gas and creeping effects of global warming, the nuclear power renaissance has become a global catchphrase.

In the U.S. the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued its first three early site permits. In the United Kingdom, a policy review concluded that nuclear power had a key role to play in the country's energy mix. This list can go on and what must really come to our attention is that the nuclear power option is under serious and active consideration in more than 30 countries that do not currently have it. They include Albania, Belarus, Yemen, Nigeria, Ghana, Venezuela, (formerly Soviet) Georgia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Vietnam, to name just a few. These countries are characterized by dramatic economic, technological, financial and educational diversity, to say nothing of their lack of any previous experience with nuclear power.

It is hardly a renaissance but rather a new and alarming reality unless the world community finds a way to develop a mechanism to rationally and fairly manage this process. Any glitch or irresponsible implementation of national nuclear power programs could have a disastrous effect on the perception of other programs just as the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl accidents did in the past. Ironically, existing international law does not impose any restrictions on countries' sovereign right to develop nuclear power as long as they are in good standing under the Nonproliferation Treaty and renounce the development of nuclear weapons. The influx of so many diverse countries anxious to jump on the nuclear renaissance bandwagon clearly requires a more visionary and cautious approach.

Much has been already accomplished and is being done by the International Atomic Energy Agency and other institutions. Numerous initiatives, though often competing and disconnected, have been launched by governments, organizations and think tanks.

What needs to be stressed is that nuclear renaissance, given its scale and potential consequences, will inevitably take us well beyond the traditional framework of a technical or nonproliferation program. It is imperative to see the forest rather than trees and coordinate far-reaching efforts toward ameliorating cross-cutting problems that plague these countries' industrial infrastructure, public governance, educational systems and private- and public-sector institutions.

One analogy may be in order. To get a valid driver's license, a person requires rigorous training, education, awareness and he or she must pass tests based on clearly defined criteria. It is equally important both for this person and all others whom he or she will eventually join in the morning traffic. Who will develop —- and how —- such guidelines and criteria to make the transition to nuclear power generation smooth and predictable for new countries lacking experience, skills, infrastructure and appropriate culture?

One forum that needs to focus on this emerging global issue of the 21st century is the forthcoming Group of Eight summit in Japan. Given our country's vast experience in the peaceful use of nuclear energy, its leaders are well-positioned to kick off this initiative and follow up a broad-based decision-making process. It is hard to speculate about the specifics of this endeavor, but one thing is perfectly clear: This mechanism must involve, as equal stakeholders, governments, international organizations and the public. It is also imperative that the ultimate objective would be to avoid putting up barriers before newcomers but rather make their passage along this path safe and secure, even if it takes longer than they may expect.

> Igor Khripunov is associate director of the Center for International Trade and Security at the University of Georgia.