I'll repeat: Obviously you wouldn't do that because it would immediately be inoperable for power purposes I don't think it should have anything to do with the form of government - after all, elected governments are perfectly capable of being kleptocracies as well; India, for instance. The form of government might moderate the factors that do give rise to problems (unhappiness representing corruption and mismanagement) but they shouldn't directly affect it. It's not like North Korea's reactors are suddenly going to become safer if they hold an election tommorow, though the conditions fostered by an election might help eventually (or might not, depending on the policies adopted). Moreover, it's sort of misleading to think that Western reactors are all that much safer than, say, Russian ones. Although none of them have been major, over 70% of all nuclear accidents to date have happened in the US, even though the US doesn't have anywhere near that large a share of all the reactors in the world. It's more true to say that post-Chernobyl reactors are safer than pre-Chernobyl reactors.