Since the end of the Cold War, nuclear politics have been far less centered around the apocalyptic rhetoric of terms like “mutually-assured destruction,” “megadeath,”and “global nuclear fallout.” Instead, with the world becoming smaller and more connected with every passing week, nuclear technology occupies a place of both economic and political clout.

For the United States, non-proliferation has been the name of the game since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Next year will be an opportunity for the U.S. and its allies to fill in some of the gaps in the treaty, which will be at its five-yearly review. These gaps include nuclear armed states like Israel, as well as rogue states like Iran and North Korea, which have mocked the treaty in their own ways.

In an article in the Economist it is made clear that “North Korea never tried hard to disguise its plans, and now doesn’t bother: it claims to have tested two bombs in the past three years and to be building more. But Iran personifies a more insidious problem: that of separating civilian from military nuclear technology—and intentions.”

Because the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT, guarantees the right to the pursuit of peaceful nuclear technology, Iran has had leverage against the sanctions imposed by the United States and the U.N., but has failed to provide any semblance of transparency about its program.

One plan on the table to discourage secret nuclear weapons programs disguised as nuclear energy technology is to create a bank from which countries pursuing peaceful nuclear power can buy the fuel. The United States supports this, largely because it can sell its own nuclear waste on the market in order for it to be reprocessed and reused for power. This may be politically hard to achieve, however, because of regional disputes.

For example, if the bank is opened only to nations who have signed the NPT, allies of the United States, like Israel, will be excluded, while questionable states like Syria will have free reign to purchase nuclear fuel – the building block of both peaceful nuclear power and the fissile material used in the bomb.

Though the United States will likely be selling both technology and construction of nuclear plants to countries looking to expand their energy production, the road towards a peaceful nuclear world will be paved with many hurdles. And although President Bill Clinton’s visit to North Korea this past week may have been a precursor to the reopening of nuclear talks there, North Korea and Iran have been slippery in negotiations to say the least.

Without raising too many eyebrows, we can’t simply dismiss the fact that the market for nuclear power is huge, and the United States is probably the nation best suited for exporting the technology. That being said, determining how best to approach the potentially volatile marketplace will pose a brand new set of challenges to the global community as we look towards the future of energy, security and economics.