No.
The Key issue with nuclear is the regulatory regime under which it is built.
A basic reactor is about the same amount of labour and materials as a coal fired power station. And can be put up in a couple of years.
Regulatory approval streches the process to a decade and triples the capital cost and cpaital cots is teh far and away largest single cost in nuclear power generation, followed by O & M costs.
French are worse.
Google Okiluoto and Flammanville.
You are barking up the wrong tree. All nuclear companies are multinational.
What is happening however is that people are trying to get type approval for a reactor that can be mass produced in a factory and shipped to its site
This isn't abpout economies of scale though, it sa about circumventing regulation.
We arent doing it because on the one hand no one wants to pour billions into a project that can be stopped with a stroke of the regulatry pen, and on teh wother we arent dong it becase there is no need to solve the low C2 energy production iussue, because AGW is a crock of shit. Amd attemptinmg tpo solcve it but not solving it at all is a way to make shitloads of subsidised money .
We have had a century of communism and socialism. It has achieved bugger all. Because in order to exist it needs problems it can pretend to solve.