Paul T. Shipale (with inputs by Folito Nghitongovali Diawara Gaspar)
A new chapter in Namibia and China relations
The recent state visit to China has undoubtedly opened a new chapter in Namibia’s relationship with one of the world’s leading economic powers.
Beyond the anticipated bilateral agreements, investment commitments, financing arrangements, and technology partnerships, one announcement has attracted particular attention: the government’s intention to develop a national nuclear energy policy, supported by legislation, to harness Namibia’s vast uranium resources for domestic electricity generation.
The announcement has been presented as a bold step towards energy security and industrial transformation. It deserves serious public debate.
The real question is not whether nuclear energy is good or bad. The real question is whether it is the right priority for Namibia at this stage of its development.
Nuclear power is the result of development, not its beginning
Far too often, developing countries mistake symbols of modernity for the foundations of development. Nuclear power stations are among the most sophisticated engineering projects in the world, but they are not what makes a nation developed.
They are the result of decades of institutional maturity, scientific investment, industrial growth, and disciplined governance.
A nuclear power station is not the beginning of development but it is often one of its outcomes.
Before discussing reactors, Namibia must first ask what kind of economy it intends to power.
What is the purpose of a nuclear power station?
The primary purpose of nuclear energy is not prestige. It is to provide reliable, continuous electricity capable of supporting heavy industry, advanced manufacturing, mineral processing, large scale transport systems, digital infrastructure, and sustained economic expansion.
Electricity is only valuable when it powers productive economic activity.
If the country’s economy remains dominated by the export of raw materials, with limited manufacturing and value addition, then we should take into consideration who will consume the enormous amount of electricity that a nuclear power station is designed to produce?
Energy policy should follow economic strategy, not replace it.
Can Namibia afford to prioritise nuclear energy today?
Namibia undoubtedly needs long term energy security. However, energy planning cannot be separated from the broader realities facing the nation.
Can we realistically prioritise one of the world’s most expensive energy technologies while many communities continue to struggle with inadequate healthcare, overcrowded schools, youth unemployment, housing shortages, water insecurity, sanitation challenges, weak public transport, and limited industrial capacity?
These are not arguments against nuclear energy. They are arguments for sequencing national priorities wisely.
A nation cannot build sustainable technological ambition while many of its basic developmental foundations remain fragile.
Development begins with strong institutions
No country becomes industrialised simply by signing memoranda of understanding or announcing ambitious projects.
Industrialisation requires skilled engineers, scientists, technicians, research institutions, vocational education, efficient public administration, reliable infrastructure, competitive industries, transparent procurement systems, and institutions capable of implementing complex national projects.
Without these foundations, even the most ambitious agreements risk becoming expensive political announcements rather than engines of transformation.
The hidden costs and risks of nuclear energy
A nuclear programme demands extraordinary institutional capacity. It requires an independent nuclear regulator, highly trained nuclear engineers and safety specialists, sophisticated emergency response systems, cybersecurity, environmental monitoring, strict international safeguards, transparent governance, and a permanent strategy for managing radioactive waste that will remain hazardous for generations.
The financial risks are equally significant. Around the world, nuclear power plants have frequently exceeded their original budgets and construction schedules, placing enormous pressure on public finances.
For developing economies, these financial burdens can limit investment in other sectors that directly improve citizens’ quality of life.
While modern nuclear technology is considerably safer than earlier generations, accidents, however rare, can have consequences that extend across generations.
Safety must therefore be measured not only by engineering standards but also by the strength of the institutions responsible for enforcing them.
Namibia already has a strategic energy advantage
Namibia is already endowed with exceptional natural advantages. It possesses some of the world’s highest solar irradiation, significant wind potential, abundant uranium resources, and vast open land suitable for renewable energy development.
These resources position the country to become one of Africa’s leading producers of renewable energy while supporting green hydrogen, regional electricity exports, and domestic industrialisation.
The question is not whether Namibia should eventually develop nuclear energy. The question is whether renewable energy, industrial expansion, and human capital development should first create the economic conditions that justify such an investment.
The Chinese lesson goes beyond technology
China did not become a technological superpower by beginning with nuclear reactors. It first invested heavily in education, infrastructure, manufacturing, scientific research, industrial capacity, and state institutions.
Only after building these foundations did it expand into increasingly sophisticated technologies.
This may be the most valuable lesson Namibia should take home from Beijing.
The greatest achievement of the visit should not be the agreements signed, but the understanding that transformation requires discipline, continuity, institutional excellence, and long term national planning.
The real investment Namibia must make
If Namibia genuinely intends to pursue nuclear energy, the conversation must extend far beyond the construction of a power station.
It must include a national strategy to educate thousands of engineers, physicists, technicians, regulators, and scientists.
It must strengthen universities, modernise technical colleges, invest in research institutions, improve governance, expand industrial capacity, and create an economy capable of converting abundant electricity into sustainable prosperity.
Otherwise, the country risks constructing an impressive technological monument without building the economy required to sustain it.
The true measure of success
The success of this state visit will not be measured by the number of agreements signed in Beijing or the ambition of official announcements.
It will be measured by what exists ten or twenty years from now, stronger institutions, diversified industries, reliable public services, quality education, productive employment, modern infrastructure, technological capability, and a higher standard of living for ordinary Namibians.
Nuclear energy may one day become an important pillar of Namibia’s development. But no reactor can substitute for capable institutions, sound governance, industrial capacity, or human capital.
The most important investment Namibia can make today is not in nuclear technology itself, but in the people, institutions, and productive economy that will one day make such technology both necessary and sustainable.
Development is not built by chasing symbols of progress. It is built by laying strong foundations and having the discipline to build upon them, one generation at a time.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of our employers or this newspaper. They represent our personal views as citizens and Pan-Africanists.
