Opinion - From moonshots to megawatts: Fusion's Cold War moment
The rivalry, fueled by the existential anxieties of the Cold War, paradoxically propelled humanity forward. Today, we stand on the threshold of another transformative milestone — achieving practical nuclear fusion. And once again, competition, particularly among the U.S., China and Europe, may prove critical.
Idealists often advocate global cooperation, envisioning pooled resources and collective progress. However, historical realities suggest that competitive pressure often yields faster, more substantial results. The sluggish progress of ITER, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, a collaboration of 35 nations including the U.S., China, Russia and several European countries, illustrates the inherent inefficiencies in sprawling multinational cooperation.
Initially proposed in 1985, ITER's schedule has repeatedly slipped, with first plasma now anticipated no sooner than 2034. Development setbacks, bureaucratic inertia, conflicting national interests, inconsistent funding, and prolonged negotiations have significantly hindered progress.
Contrast ITER's delays with the rapid advances of private and national fusion efforts. In the U.S., ventures such as Commonwealth Fusion Systems, driven by academic ingenuity and substantial private investments, have reached critical milestones. Commonwealth recently demonstrated a groundbreaking high-temperature superconducting magnet, a crucial advancement toward viable fusion energy. Today, more than 50 private startups globally have attracted more than $8 billion in investment, all racing to be the first to commercialize fusion.
China, too, has aggressively advanced its fusion ambitions. Chinese researchers working on the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak, popularly known as the 'artificial sun,' recently maintained plasma at over 120 million degrees Celsius for more than 400 seconds, a remarkable achievement that brings fusion significantly closer to practical application. These achievements make clear that when the stakes are high, competitive dynamics accelerate progress in ways international collaborations often cannot.
Europe, often perceived as a collaborative partner in ITER, is now asserting itself as a formidable competitor in the fusion arena. The European Union has long supported fusion research through such initiatives as EUROfusion, which coordinates research across numerous European laboratories. Facilities such as the Joint European Torus in the UK and the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator in Germany have achieved significant milestones, demonstrating Europe's commitment to advancing fusion technology.
Moreover, European startups such as Marvel Fusion in Germany have attracted substantial investments to develop innovative fusion approaches, signaling a shift towards a more competitive stance in the global fusion race.
The historical parallels are instructive. The Cold War-era space race between the U.S. and the Soviet Union resulted in unprecedented technological achievements. Beyond landing astronauts on the moon, this competition spurred developments in microelectronics, telecommunications, materials science and computing. The intense desire to outperform a geopolitical rival drove nations to push technological limits, delivering widespread benefits continuously.
Could NASA have achieved the moon landing sooner had it been obligated to negotiate every decision with multiple international partners? The answer is unequivocally no. Multilateral consensus-building, however well-intentioned, tends to slow decision-making and dilute ambition.
This lesson applies directly to the fusion race. With the accelerating impacts of climate change and global energy demands expected to rise by nearly 50 percent by 2050, fusion energy's promise — clean, abundant, and nearly limitless energy — is urgently needed. Fusion has the potential to decarbonize global energy grids, diminish geopolitical tensions over fossil fuels, and provide stable energy to developing nations.
Of course, competition is not without critics. Some argue it leads to duplication, secrecy, or geopolitical tension. Yet history and current fusion progress show competition can sharpen focus, streamline resources, and accelerate timelines where cooperation might stall.
Indeed, competition among the U.S., China and Europe is about more than mere technological superiority; it shapes geopolitical alliances, influences global economic dynamics, and may redefine leadership in the 21st century. Just as the U.S. emerged from the space race as a global technological and economic powerhouse, the victor in fusion development will likely dictate future standards for global energy and technology governance.
Fusion technology inherently offers widespread humanitarian benefits. Even if initial successes are regionally concentrated, these breakthroughs will inevitably diffuse globally due to their immense economic and environmental advantages. Like space-derived innovations such as satellite technology and computing, fusion's benefits will become universally accessible.
Climate negotiations at COP28 underscore the difficulties inherent in international cooperation. Achieving even minimal consensus on reducing fossil fuel production (The 'transition away from fossil fuels' agreement) was politically contentious and largely ineffective, delivering superficial agreements that catered more to geopolitical power dynamics than to any meaningful climate solutions. Such bureaucratic delays and diluted outcomes illustrate why humanity cannot afford to rely solely on multilateral cooperation.
Ultimately, the fusion race is not merely a geopolitical contest; it is a vital competition for human survival and global prosperity. While competition may not always be harmonious or efficient, neither was the space race. Yet, the space race advanced humanity dramatically. Allowing the fusion race to unfold unhindered may again deliver swift, transformative solutions at a time when humanity urgently needs them. Our planet and our future depend on embracing this competitive drive.
Oded Gour-Lavie is CEO and co-founder of nT-Tao, a compact fusion power company based in Israel.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Wall Street Journal
22 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Patriot System Will Be Sent to Ukraine, Trump Says
President Trump said Sunday the U.S. will send Patriot air-defense systems to Ukraine that will be paid for by the European Union, and he again criticized Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'It'll be business for us, and we will send them Patriots, which they desperately need, because Putin really surprised a lot of people,' Trump said. 'He talks nice, and then he bombs everybody in the evening,' he added on his way back to the White House from New Jersey. 'There's a little bit of a problem there, and I don't like it.'


The Hill
32 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump says US will send Patriot missiles to Ukraine
President Trump on Sunday said that the United States will be sending Patriot air defense munitions to Ukraine, reiterating his disappointment with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The president wouldn't say how many Patriot systems or missiles will go to Ukraine but noted the U.S. isn't going to be paying for the supply. 'I haven't agreed on the number yet, but they're going to have some because they do need protection, but the European Union is paying for it. We're not paying anything for it, but we will send it,' Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews on his return to Washington. He added, 'we will send them Patriots, which they desperately need because Putin has really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice and then he bombs everybody in the evening. A little bit of a problem there. I don't like it.' He also said he will have a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at the White House on Monday. Trump on Thursday said a deal has been struck with NATO to send weapons to Ukraine, with the military alliance bearing the brunt of the cost. Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with Putin, saying earlier this month after a call with him that the Russian leader has made 'no progress' in ending the three-year war in Eastern Europe. The Defense Department last week halted the delivery of some air defense missiles and munitions to Ukraine, citing concerns about U.S. military stockpiles being depleted. The White House at the time confirmed the decision, saying it was made after a review of the U.S. military's backing of other nations around the world. Trump reversed course days later, with the Pentagon saying Tuesday it would send 'additional defensive weapons to Ukraine to ensure the Ukrainians can defend themselves while we work to secure a lasting peace and ensure the killing stops,' citing Trump's direction for the move. Trump later told reporters that he didn't know who approved the weapons shipment halt.


CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
CNBC Daily Open: Surprise tariff salvo on Saturday
No one likes working over the weekend. Unless you are the leader of the free world firing off social media posts — that is, after all, what counts as work for many politicians nowadays —announcing barriers to the free movement of goods. It's anyone's guess why U.S. President Donald Trump posted tariff letters to the European Union and Mexico — a steep 30% on goods imported from both — on Saturday. The first batch of letters was released Monday, and the second Wednesday. Going by that cadence, the latest letters should have been sent Friday. Nope. Here are two completely speculative conjectures: Perhaps Trump wanted to save off his most devastating salvos — the EU and Mexico were, in 2024, the top-two largest trade partners of the U.S. — for when the markets were closed, hence avoiding any immediate backlash from traders. But that seems unlikely, given that Trump told NBC News on Thursday that he thinks "the tariffs have been very well-received" because "the stock market hit a new high" then. And, as JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon pointed out on the same day, there is "complacency in the markets" because investors are a "little desensitized" to tariff news. Perhaps Trump just wanted to annoy his counterparts, especially those on the continent. Working on a weekend might be exasperating to an American, but it's basically sacrilegious for Europeans. The combination of unexpectedly high tariffs — comments last week from Trump and U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick gave the impression a favorable deal was in the books — and violating the right to disconnect would be sure to rile up Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, and her ilk. Perhaps there's no point in trying to make sense of the announcements' timing, let alone the tariffs. The only thing that's certain is that, for many, there was no dancing on a Saturday night. The U.S. imposes 30% tariffs on the EU and Mexico. Trump on Saturday revealed those tariffs in letters posted on Truth Social. The EU suspended its retaliatory tariffs, which were scheduled to take effect Monday, in hopes of reaching a deal. U.S. stock futures slip Sunday evening stateside. Last week, all three major U.S. indexes fell on a weekly basis as investors braced themselves for more tariff announcements — which indeed came over the weekend. The Stoxx Europe 600 fell 1.01% Friday. Trump can 'certainly' fire Powell. Those comments were made by National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett on Sunday stateside, who said that "if there's cause," Trump can remove Jerome Powell from his position as Federal Reserve chair. 'You're losing,' Jamie Dimon tells Europe. On Thursday, JPMorgan's CEO said at Ireland's Department of Foreign Affairs that "Europe has gone from 90% U.S. GDP to 65% over 10 or 15 years. That's not good." [PRO] Earnings season kicks off. Investors will want to keep an eye on second-quarter financial statements from big banks, such as JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs, this week. But more important is their outlook on the second half of the year. U.S. tariffs take center stage but China and the EU are quietly clashing In recent weeks, European Union restrictions on Chinese companies taking part in public tenders for medical devices were quickly met with China imposing import curbs on such products. Separately, long-threatened Chinese duties on brandy from the EU came into force earlier this month, and both Beijing and Brussels have ramped up criticism of each another. Altogether, EU-China trade relations are now "quite poor," according to Marc Julienne, director of the Center of Asian Studies at the French Institute of International Relations. —