Access to civil nuclear technologies crucial to development?

Last week, Libya released the five Bulgarian nurses and Palestinian doctor who had been held for eight years on charges of deliberately infecting over 400 children with the HIV virus, with some final help from France's president Sarkozy's wife. The day after their return to Europe, President Sarkozy paid a visit to Tripoli to negotiate a deal with Libya to build a nuclear power plant to be used to desalinate sea water for drinking water. Some people have accused this deal as being a "ransom" for the medics' release. Sarkozy denies these accusations.

Sarkozy defended the project, saying access to civil nuclear technologies
was crucial to the development of countries in the region. - http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070020460

The combination of the words “nuclear” and Libya was bound to get people
screaming foul. Sarkozy’s reply is splendid: “Nuclear power is the energy of the
future. If we don’t give the energy of the future to the countries of the
Southern Mediterranean, how will they develop themselves? And if they don’t
develop how will we fight terrorism and fanaticism? And if we don’t consider
Arab countries sensible enough to use civilian nuclear power, the West risks a
war of civilizations.” - http://arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=99090&d=30&m=7&y=2007

In 2003, Libya had announced its intention to dismantle their nuclear weapons program.



Environmentalist group Greenpeace said France was irresponsible for exporting its nuclear technology for civilian needs.



The first issue in these articles (both of which discuss the release of the medics in conjunction with the nuclear power plant) is how closely, if at all, these two occurrences are. Was Libya's treatment of these six people over-zealous and unfounded? And if so (most seem to think it was), then was it used as a bargaining tactic with the rest of the world to get aid? It seems that the families of those children who were infected with HIV, many of which have subsequently died, are being compensated over a million dollars apiece. (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22096828-32682,00.html)
Some of this money will be coming from the Libyan government, some from Europe, it seems.

The other issues is whether helping Libya to build a nuclear power plants is really the way towards development. Sarkozy states that nuclear power is the way of the future, which is part of development, which connects with fighting terrorism and fanatacism, and ultimately he is connecting nuclear power with preventing a war of civilizations (see quote above). I think that statement is a bit far-fetched or at least over-extravagant in its scope. What do you think?

It always worries me when people think that by bringing this one giant thing that is "modern" into a country will somehow magically make everything better. Take the example in the Isbister text about the Indira Gandhi Canal in India (p. 148).

It is apparent that Libya wants this help though, I think. I am curious though if it is the wealthy people in Libya who want to become more wealthy through this, or if it really will help the general population to live better lives...?