In the first four months of this year, a spate of countries signed more than six major nuclear agreements. The potential value of these deals is many billions of dollars. President Bush led the pack in late January with his Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. The plan, which would recycle spent fuel and give it to countries in exchange for non-proliferation agreements, was followed by the controversial U.S.-India deal that continues to divide Congress. Next came France and Libya with their own agreement to develop Libya’s nuclear program. Russia sold uranium to India. China agreed to buy uranium from Australia (see this month’s cover story, “China and Australia,” on page 15). China agreed to help Pakistan after the U.S. refused. And not to be left out, North Korea asked the U.S. to re-open talks on its long-contested nuclear desires.

Amid all this globalization, a group of nuclear superpowers has emerged: the United States, France, Russia, China, India, the U.K., and Japan. But nuclear energy isn’t just a game for the big countries. Everyone wants in. From Turkey to Mexico and South Africa to Venezuela, countries are clamoring for assistance with their programs.

In 1955 in Geneva, the United Nations hosted the first international conference on the peaceful use of nuclear energy, and two years later, the International Atomic Energy Agency was born. But most countries were still going it alone: the U.S. worked on its fledgling reactors while the Soviet Union built a nuclear-powered warship. The main focus of international agreements was on how to prevent others from getting access to the fuel. But at the dawn of what is being heralded as the nuclear renaissance, cooperation has become commonplace.

President Bush has said his global initiatives will reduce proliferation by allowing the world to keep track of its nuclear fuel. Richard Meserve, former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the current chairman of an international nuclear safety group, says transparency could prevent another Chernobyl. A repeat of such an accident could scare the world away from nuclear power altogether. “We have to have continuing attention to safety around the globe. A tragedy elsewhere could create many problems worldwide,” Meserve said.

Many within the industry stress that internationalization of nuclear power will make reactors cheaper, faster, and safer to build. Today’s buzzword is “standardization.” Nuclear companies want to use the same designs, the same safety guidelines, and the same pricing estimates to manage their costs – many of which will be unknown until more plants are built. “Standardization will result in a better, more detailed, and more thorough safety evaluation for each design. It could also lead to a significantly higher level of efficiency in the licensing process,” NRC Chairman Nils Diaz told a conference of industry insiders in February.

Countries are also feeling pressure from nuclear companies to forge international agreements. For instance, a group of American utilities warned the U.S. government in April that there will be severe fuel shortages by 2013 unless the industry is allowed to import uranium directly from Russia.

Among the more practical aspects of international cooperation is the effort to develop an international licensing process for reactors. The Multinational Design Approval Program, Diaz’ brainchild, is in its formative stages, but would ultimately allow regulators from different countries to share information about reactor designs.

“The basic idea behind the proposal is that there is a great deal of information that can be shared as the designs go forward in separate countries,” said commission spokesman Scott Burnell. “Individual countries would retain the right to licensing, but before you get to that stage there are some commonalities, some common goals that countries could agree on for designs.”

The NRC would like to use the European Pressurized Reactor, a French design, as the program’s test case. The NRC would consult with regulators in France and Finland, where a 1,600-megawatt EPR reactor is under construction. One potential problem with the multinational process would be getting clearance to work with regulators in countries that have not signed non-proliferation treaties.

Both the U.S. and Russia are jockeying for the role of global leader. America has 104 reactors, with plans to build at least a dozen more. Meanwhile, Russia is cultivating its fuel relationships by supplying reactor rods to India and courting the Chinese. But no matter who gets the bigger slice of the pie, it is clear that more international cooperation will be key to the continuing globalization of nuclear power.