I don't think the military angle plays a big role in the British case. Hinkley C uses mostly foreign technologies and expertise, not domestic one. There were even talks about building a plant using Chinese technologies! Also submarine and power plant reactors are two very different beasts, so building the latter does not help much with maintaining expertise for the former. Plus Britain is quite dependent on the US help to maintain its nuclear capabilities.
But I think it's true for Russia, maintaining full nuclear cycle does help with supporting its military nuclear capabilities. Thus the substantial political support which the industry gets there. For example the floating plant [0] is based on reactors used in icebreakers, which in turn have roots in submarine reactors.
But I think it's true for Russia, maintaining full nuclear cycle does help with supporting its military nuclear capabilities. Thus the substantial political support which the industry gets there. For example the floating plant [0] is based on reactors used in icebreakers, which in turn have roots in submarine reactors.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_floating_nuclear_power...