As Armenia prepares for a new era in energy policy, the country is once again turning to nuclear power — but with a very different strategy than in the past. Instead of relying solely on large-scale Soviet-style reactors, officials are now signaling interest in small modular reactors (SMRs), a new generation of compact nuclear plants designed to be safer, faster to build, and more adaptable to the needs of smaller countries.  Armenia is currently working to prolong the operation of the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant by an additional decade, until 2036, when it intends to replace it with a small modular reactor-based facility.

For Armenia, a nation seeking greater energy independence while balancing economic and geopolitical pressures, the shift toward modular nuclear technology could mark one of the most consequential infrastructure decisions since the construction of the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant. Yet the plans have already sparked debate, with critics questioning the financial viability, long-term safety, and geopolitical implications of adopting relatively untested nuclear technologies. Although Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan insists that the construction of a new nuclear power plant in Armenia is an economic rather than a political issue, the choice of foreign partner — whether Russia, the United States, France, China, or South Korea — is widely seen as a decision that could shape the country’s geopolitical orientation for decades. Experts from American energy consulting firms recently visited Armenia to support the country’s assessment of U.S. small modular reactor technology following a pre-feasibility study on replacing the Metsamor nuclear power plant. Russia has proposed to Armenia a high-capacity nuclear power plant project that could meet the country’s energy needs for decades, if not a century, according to a Russian Foreign Ministry official in an interview with TASS. As of now, Armenian authorities have not made a final decision on which country they will cooperate with to build a new nuclear power plant meaning the choice of technology and partner remains open. Meanwhile, Armenian experts are currently assessing the most suitable option for the country’s future nuclear energy strategy, including a detailed evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of small modular reactor technology.

Ara Marjanyan: Small Modular Reactors Remain Unproven For Commercial Use, Expert Warns

In a conversation with the Caucasus Watch, UN National Expert on Energy Dr. Ara Marjanyan ensures that the key drawback of small modular nuclear reactors is that they are not yet in commercial operation and remain in an active stage of development. “For example, in the United States there is a dedicated program focused on developing seven small modular reactor designs, yet none of them are currently in operation and all must still undergo licensing. This means that SMRs can only realistically be considered a reliable source of electricity in 10–15 years. As a result, even if the technology proves effective, it could still come too late for Armenia, given that the country is expected to have a new operational nuclear unit by the end of 2036”.

Speaking about the proposals offered to Armenia, Marjanyan notes that the most comprehensive proposal has come from Russia’s state-owned Rosatom, which is offering not only conventional VVER-1200 reactor technology but also small modular reactor solutions, along with other reactor designs. There are less developed proposals from South Korea and France. With the United States, a process is underway under the so-called “One-Two-Three” agreement framework, which has yet to be signed and must then be ratified in the United States and likely in Armenia as well. Under this agreement, the United States could transfer nuclear energy technologies to Armenia.

When asked about Armenia’s requirements, plans, and expectations, the UN energy expert offers his personal view: “Armenia needs VVER-type nuclear reactors with an installed capacity of at least 1,200 megawatts. This is supported by plans related to large data centers, the ‘Recovery, Resilience and Development of Syunik’ (R2D Syunik) program, the anticipated rapid expansion of electric transport, and, more broadly, the vision of a dynamically growing society.”

Arthur Avetisyan: Nuclear Energy - a Key Component of Armenia’s National Security

Energy security expert, Director of the “Armenian Energy Initiative” research and analytical center, Associate Professor Arthur Avetisyan while speaking with us, emphasized that, although Armenian authorities have expressed a preference for modular options, no official decision has yet been made. Additionally, in 2023, by decision of the Prime Minister, an interagency commission was established with the mandate to review, study, and analyze all possible options and proposals, including modular ones, and to provide relevant professional conclusions.

“On that basis—and potentially also factoring in a political component—the government will take a corresponding step, though I am not yet aware of any such move. It is also unclear whether the interagency commission has submitted its conclusion to the government; in other words, there is no information on where the process may have stalled—whether between the commission and the government, or between the government and the public. “Nevertheless, there is still no official decision, which is not a positive development, as time is limited and, in Armenia’s case, this delay works against us—since nuclear technologies, regardless of type, are inherently time-consuming processes,” Avetisyan warns. Regarding the modular option, the expert notes that it currently raises more questions than answers for all countries, including Armenia.

At present, Russia has one small modular reactor in civilian use, deployed on a naval platform as a floating unit. Russia is also developing the RITM-200 program to produce a land-based version, but according to various estimates, completion is expected no earlier than 2029 in the best case and around 2031 in the worst. China has a functioning plant in the testing phase and, if progress continues as expected, is set to receive final International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) approval this autumn, potentially becoming the world’s only operational land-based small modular reactor. Other countries, including France, the United States, South Korea, and a French–Canadian consortium, remain in testing phases with ongoing projects. Globally, about 80–100 small modular reactor designs are under development, but apart from Russia and China, none are yet tested or licensed. The IAEA informally expects countries offering nuclear technology to already operate a licensed, grid-connected plant to demonstrate real-world viability for export approval. As a result, most claimed advantages and drawbacks of small modular reactors remain largely theoretical, with more open questions than confirmed outcomes in practice. No one can yet say the technology is definitively bad, but claims that it is unquestionably good are equally misleading. This is mainly because there is still no real-world operational track record, despite numerous studies on safety and performance. There are currently no operational small modular reactors or documented accident experience, leaving no real-world evidence of how incidents would be contained or managed. As a result, the system’s real-world performance cannot yet be reliably assessed. With over a decade available for consideration, Armenia could have evaluated SMR options from Russia, the U.S., or China. Although public signals in recent years suggested progress, no official decision has been made. This uncertainty concerns some experts, given that nuclear energy remains the main viable peaceful option for Armenia. This issue is increasingly relevant to the green energy transition, as the European Commission classified nuclear energy as “green” in its taxonomy in 2022, a decision reaffirmed in 2025. Several countries have since incorporated nuclear power into their green energy policies. In Armenia, a related decision and policy framework are also being developed under a national taxonomy system. In the first two drafts, nuclear energy was excluded; however, the final version is reportedly being completed and is expected to classify nuclear power as “green.” In this context, nuclear energy is increasingly viewed as a key pillar of the global green transition, as solar, wind, and other renewables alone are seen as insufficient to meet rapidly rising electricity demand. From energy, environmental, and economic perspectives, nuclear power is therefore increasingly considered to have no real alternative and is also viewed as an important component of Armenia’s national security,” Arthur Avetisyan suggests.

Arthur Avetisyan also noted that consultations and negotiations are ongoing not only with the United States, France, Russia, and China, but also with South Korea. However, he said it is unclear whether China has made a concrete proposal to Armenia or whether Armenia has formally approached China on this issue. At the same time, the expert noted that while the choice of small modular reactors is not currently justified on professional grounds, if Armenia ultimately has valid reasons to pursue the modular option, China would have a comparative advantage over the other countries mentioned. In his view, Russia, the United States, France, and South Korea are all less advanced in this field than China. “After China, Russia is the next most advanced in small modular reactors, followed by France, South Korea, and the United States. However, in conventional reactors of 600 MW and above, the ranking shifts: Russia leads clearly, followed by China, France, South Korea, and the United States,” the expert noted.

According to Arthur Avetisyan, Armenia’s electricity demand is expected to rise significantly in the medium and long term due to regional conditions and new trends. These include potential data center development, the global shift to electric transport, and the gradual introduction of modern industrial technologies, all of which are increasing projected consumption beyond previously modest growth levels. Arthur Avetisyan believes that if these trends materialize, Armenia will need not only large amounts of electricity but also a stable and reliable supply, reducing dependence on weather conditions and other disruptions. From this perspective, he argues, nuclear energy naturally becomes the priority option.

“In that case, we would need a reactor with a capacity of no less than 600 megawatts, rather than a set of small modules—10 or 20 units assembled to reach 600 MW—because there is no such operational experience. In the longer term, cooperation along a West–East axis may also become a realistic option, in which case even a 1,000-megawatt nuclear power plant could prove insufficient for Armenia’s needs. The decision must be grounded in rational, long-term considerations rather than short-term or conjunctural factors,” the expert stresses.

It is unclear whether public hearings or consultations with civil society and experts have taken place. “I can say on behalf of the research and analytical center ‘Armenian Energy Initiative,’ which I head, that in 2023 we organized two roundtable discussions with experienced energy sector specialists. As a result of these discussions—both the first and the second—a conclusion was reached with an absolute consensus: there is no alternative to nuclear energy in Armenia’s energy sector, and there cannot be one. In short, if Armenia is to implement all these programs, it will require significant generating capacity. In fact, a 1,000-megawatt plant would be suitable for Armenia’s electricity demand, but in international terms this is considered a medium-scale capacity, while large-scale facilities typically range from at least 4,000 to 5,000 megawatts,” Avetisyan concludes. 

Vahe Davtyan: Armenia needs stable, high-capacity baseload power with export potential

Our next interlocutor, Professor of Political Science and an expert in energy security issues, Vahe Davtyan, notes that while small modular reactors represent an interesting technological direction, their applicability in the case of Armenia remains uncertain.

“Today, SMRs worldwide are mainly at the design or pilot deployment stage, and there are virtually no established examples of large-scale commercial operation. For this reason, Armenia could find itself not as a user of a fully mature technology, but rather in the position of an experimental testing platform. The main advantage for Armenia may be its relatively small capacity and the possibility of phased implementation. Theoretically, SMRs require lower initial investment costs and shorter construction timelines. In addition, they are presented as a more flexible solution for smaller and more decentralized power systems. However, Armenia’s strategic challenges are not limited solely to domestic consumption. The country also seeks to maintain and develop its role in regional electricity transmission networks, particularly within the framework of the North–South energy corridor. From this perspective, Armenia requires stable baseload generation with high output and export potential. In this regard, a traditional large- or medium-capacity nuclear unit appears to be more aligned with Armenia’s long-term strategic interests. Ultimately, if Armenia aims to establish itself as an industrial economy rather than remaining within its current service and trade-oriented model, it will require stable and large-scale generating capacities. In addition, SMRs raise economic concerns. Several assessments suggest that the cost of electricity they generate could be relatively high. For example, some SMR projects in the United States have been discontinued for this reason,” Vahe Davtyan notes.

Analyzing ongoing global processes, Vahe Davtyan notes that Armenia is currently seeking to establish itself as an important player in the development of artificial intelligence. He also refers to the large-scale program being implemented by the American company NVIDIA. “At the same time, it should be realized that AI infrastructure and data centers require enormous energy consumption, which is unlikely to be covered by solar power plants alone. Therefore, a nuclear power plant capable of providing stable, large-scale generation becomes a strategic necessity for Armenia. On the other hand, the world is experiencing a nuclear renaissance today. This is manifested in a variety of regions. This trend is also dynamically developing around Armenia: Turkey, Iran, the Middle East: the UAE, Saudi Arabia, North Africa, Central Asia, etc. Moreover, Baku has recently announced plans to include a nuclear power plant in Azerbaijan’s energy balance. In this context, subordinating nuclear energy to renewables in Armenia’s case would be a critical strategic mistake,” the expert is convinced.

Speaking about the proposals presented to Armenia, Vahe Davtyan notes that Russia’s offer includes both the construction of a VVER-1200 reactor and a new power unit based on the RITM-200N small modular reactor technology. According to him, the main advantage of these options is that they are already proven and operational technologies, while Armenia also has many years of cooperation experience with Rosatom in areas such as fuel supply, technical maintenance, and specialist training.

Referring to the direction of SMR technology being discussed by the US, Vahe Davtyan, like our previous interlocutors, also points to the fact that it has not yet been fully commercialized, even in its country of origin.

“This initiative also carries a broader political dimension, linked to the deepening of U.S.–Armenian strategic cooperation, including within the framework of the so-called ‘123 Agreement. The signing of the latter, however, does not constitute a basis for project implementation per se; it merely lifts restrictions on the export of U.S. nuclear technologies to Armenia’’, expert alludes. 

In the case of France, Vahe Davtyan notes that interest is mainly linked to the expansion of European energy and technological presence; however, at this stage, no concrete technological proposals have been publicly announced.

There are also periodic discussions regarding China; however, at this stage they remain largely at a theoretical and political level rather than a practical one. "Today, China skillfully combines Russian and American technologies, while simultaneously acting, along with Russia, as a country operating a modular reactor. And that provides certain advantages. However, at least from the official rhetoric, it is clear that Beijing is not offering Armenia a complete project today, but simply cooperation in the field of nuclear energy development and security,” Vahe Davtyan notes.

Overall, Vahe Davtyan describes the current situation as a competitive phase, in which different power centers are seeking to strengthen their positions in Armenia’s nuclear energy sector, At the same time, he adds that, in terms of public or private sector involvement, the most clearly defined role at present continues to be held by Russia’s Rosatom and its subsidiaries, particularly Rosatom Service, which is engaged in the modernization programs of the Armenian Nuclear Power Plant. On the U.S. side, specific companies are periodically mentioned, in particular Westinghouse, whose representatives, as is known, visited the Armenian Nuclear Power Plant in 2025. However, no officially confirmed construction consortiums or contractual arrangements have yet been made public.

As a conclusion, the expert argues that, overall, the issue of a new nuclear power plant for Armenia is not merely an energy project. It is simultaneously a matter of foreign policy orientation, economic model, and regional positioning.

Contributed by Anna Vardanyan, an Armenian political journalist and researcher with over 18 years’ experience in defence policy, international relations, and security in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, has worked for Armenian media and held advisory roles in the National Assembly of Armenia.