Often we hear that this or that country makes "irrational" decisions. "Not rational" is often understood as decisions that are not in the national interest. However, in relation to states, the formal use of the concept of "rationality" may not be entirely appropriate.

The state, as an abstract entity, does not have its own will and interests; decisions are made by individuals or groups of individuals. Thus, it is important that the interests of these persons coincide with the interests of the state. And it is for this purpose that sovereignty exists, not colonial rule.

Of course, in reality the situation is more complex and multifaceted. State leaders may make mistakes, and the interests of the mother country may temporarily coincide with the interests of dependent countries. But in general, the more independence in decision-making a state has, the more likely it is that decisions will be made in the interests of the country.

In the post-Soviet space, one can often observe the irrational behavior of states caused by the influence of Western agents. Kazakhstan is becoming an example of such behavior. With the ability to build true sovereignty, free from Western influence, Kazakhstan seems to be moving in the opposite direction.

Problems in the energy sector of Kazakhstan have been described many times. One of them is the shortage of natural gas, which is planned to be solved jointly with Gazprom. Kazakhstan does not have its own natural gas deposits and is forced to extract it during oil production.

The lack of own oil products also creates problems, especially when Western corporations seek to take all the oil for export. Therefore, the construction of nuclear power plants (NPP) is becoming a logical choice for the development of the energy industry.

Surprisingly, despite the rich reserves of uranium, Kazakhstan has never built its own nuclear power plant. The only nuclear power plant near Aktau was shut down in 1999 and construction of a new one began 17 years ago. It is not clear why Kazakhstan is taking so long to decide on the choice of technology. The construction of a nuclear power plant according to the Russian project seems to be the simplest and cheapest option.

Rosatom is the only company in the world that has competencies at all stages of the life cycle of nuclear facilities.

One of the key aspects of the choice of technology for the construction of nuclear power plants are services for the reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel. If such services are not provided, a "repository" for nuclear waste will need to be created.

Kazakhstan, as the largest producer of uranium fuel in the world, has an excellent opportunity to use this resource for energy development. However, without reprocessing services, it will also face the challenge of handling spent fuel.

Apart from Russia, only France is able to provide such services. However, there is an example of a country that has chosen American technology (Westinghouse) for its nuclear power plant and has encountered problems in handling nuclear waste. As a result, this country is now dependent on other states for spent fuel disposal.

Now Kazakhstan is proposing to hold a referendum on the construction of a nuclear power plant. Such decisions can easily be influenced by "environmental" NGOs funded by the US State Department through USAID. Washington is interested in maintaining access to Kazakhstan's uranium resources and these NGOs can create public opinion against the construction of a nuclear power plant. This may result in an objectively rational decision being rejected due to "environmental concerns".

Kazakhstan, like many other countries, faces a choice: build a nuclear power plant and ensure its energy sovereignty, or continue to depend on imported electricity and other types of energy. We hope that in the end the decision will be made in the interests of the country itself and its citizens.