While the energy crisis has a well-known public policy dimension, it also threatens the capabilities of the US military if and when a crisis should break out in East Asia.

Artificial intelligence has an insatiable appetite for electricity. Global data centers are fast becoming “energy monsters,” consuming vast amounts of power to train and operate sophisticated AI models. Renewable energy sources like wind and solar struggle to provide the consistent, stable power required for 24/7 operations. This has ignited a nuclear power acquisition war among Big Tech giants.

Amazon aggressively expanded its investment in small modular reactors (SMRs) to secure power for its AI data centers. Google signed a strategic agreement with Kairos Power to purchase energy from SMRs, while Microsoft contracted with Constellation Energy to purchase electricity from the revived Three Mile Island nuclear plant. These companies favor SMRs and micro modular reactors (MMRs) because construction costs are estimated at one-fifth of large-scale reactors, they deploy faster, and, crucially, they don’t require massive cooling water infrastructure — meaning they can be built directly adjacent to data centers.

The Pentagon’s Parallel Problem

This commercial energy crisis mirrors a critical military challenge. Modern warfare is becoming increasingly energy-intensive. Future weapon systems — Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) and high-power Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars — require massive, continuous power loads. Just as data centers cannot afford downtime, forward-deployed military bases cannot afford power failures.

The US Department of Defense foresaw this reality nearly a decade ago. In 2016, the Defense Science Board Task Force on Energy Systems released a landmark report arguing that reliance on vulnerable fuel supply lines creates unacceptable strategic vulnerabilities. During operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, significant casualties occurred not in direct combat but when convoys transporting fuel and water were attacked.

The DSB’s solution was radical —  “invert the paradigm” of military energy. Instead of relying on fragile supply chains, the military should generate abundant, independent power onsite using very Small Modular Reactors (vSMRs) or MMRs. The report suggested designating the US Army as the “executive agent” for nuclear energy applications and deploying reactor prototypes to strategic locations like Alaska or Guam.

Island Mode: The Ultimate Insurance Policy

The convergence point between AI data centers and military bases is “resilience.” Big Tech invests in MMRs to ensure servers run uninterrupted, independent of commercial grid fluctuations. Military bases need the same capability to survive in contested environments.

In a potential Indo-Pacific conflict, adversaries like the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) possess asymmetric capabilities, including electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons and cyber warfare tools designed to paralyze commercial power grids. If the grid goes down, the Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems that form the alliance’s brain could be neutralized.

A military MMR operating in “island mode”— completely detached from the vulnerable commercial grid—becomes the ultimate insurance policy. Even if city lights go out, radars keep spinning and command centers remain operational.

The Diplomatic Barrier to US-South Korean Nuclear Cooperation

Despite clear strategic alignment between US defense needs and allied capabilities, a significant institutional barrier remains. The Republic of Korea (ROK), a global leader in nuclear technology and key ally, faces a “normative glass ceiling.”

Article 13 of the 2015 ROK-U.S. Nuclear Cooperation Agreement categorically prohibits use of US-origin nuclear technology for “any military purpose.” This restriction is far more stringent than international non-proliferation norms. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and IAEA safeguards do not ban non-explosive military applications like naval propulsion or powering military bases.

Under the AUKUS partnership, Washington is facilitating Australia’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines — a far more sensitive technology than a stationary power reactor. Furthermore, the Agreed Minute of the US-EURATOM Nuclear Cooperation agreement explicitly recognizes supplying power to military bases as a “peaceful purpose.”

This creates “diplomatic asymmetry.” While Washington pursues MMRs for its own forces and supports nuclear propulsion for Australia, its “gold standard” agreement with Seoul prevents a steadfast ally — one with an exemplary non-proliferation record — from acquiring the energy resilience necessary to defend the alliance’s front line.

The Path Forward for Nuclear Cooperation

Solving this doesn’t require rewriting the entire treaty. A pragmatic solution lies in the “agreed minute” mechanism of the Nuclear Cooperation Agreement. The ROK and US could agree to interpret “production of power for military bases” not as prohibited military activity but as “peaceful purpose” aimed at infrastructure resilience—mirroring the US-EURATOM Nuclear Cooperation Agreement.

This would allow the ROK to deploy land-based MMRs for base defense under strict IAEA safeguards, ensuring transparency while closing the capability gap. The “Power of Two” strategy — combining US design and ROK manufacturing — should extend to the military domain.

By allowing the ROK to deploy military MMRs for defensive energy resilience, the United States will gain a valuable partner in maturing MMR technology, effectively implementing the vision laid out by the Defense Science Board in 2016.

The AI age belongs to those who can power it. The future battlefield belongs to those who can sustain it. For the ROK-US alliance, MMRs are the missing link to securing both.

About the Author: Joohyun Moon

Joohyun Moon is a professor of energy engineering at Dankook University. He serves as the president of the Board of Directors at the Institute for Korea Spent Nuclear Fuel. He is also the vice president of both the Korean Nuclear Society and the Korea Institute of Nuclear Materials Management. He earned his Ph.D. in nuclear engineering from Seoul National University in 1996.

Image: Shutterstock/burakyalcin

The post Why Big Tech and the Pentagon Both Need Micro Nuclear Reactors appeared first on The National Interest.