Bipartisan lawmakers raise concerns over US-Saudi nuclear agreement

Some lawmakers from both parties are warning that a newly signed US nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia could trigger a regional arms race in the Middle East.

Although the agreement stems from negotiations that began before the outbreak of the war with Iran, Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a longtime critic of Saudi Arabia, argued that announcing the deal now would have an immediate impact on the conflict.

“Everything that happens in Riyadh echoes in Tehran,” Murphy said. “One reason the United States was reluctant to offer Saudi Arabia this agreement was that we knew it would move Iran one step closer to a nuclear weapon, and that remains true today.”

Republican Senator John Kennedy said even the possibility that Saudi Arabia could one day enrich uranium would have the potential to rapidly alter the strategic balance in the region and beyond.

“I worry about nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, Japan and South Korea,” Kennedy said.

With the Trump administration having already committed to the agreement with Saudi Arabia, the authority to reject it now rests with Congress.

Blocking the agreement, however, will be difficult, as opponents would need to secure a veto-proof two-thirds majority in both chambers.

The 30-year agreement announced on Wednesday allows private US nuclear companies to export to the Saudi market and establishes a framework for US security safeguards.

While the agreement does not guarantee that Saudi Arabia will enrich uranium, and any such capability would likely take at least a decade to develop, members of Congress argue that even this initial commitment could create a domino effect.

Republican Senator John Barrasso, also a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he was concerned the agreement could further complicate US efforts to persuade Iran to abandon uranium enrichment entirely.

“I am deeply concerned about nuclear proliferation in the Middle East because of the consequences it could produce,” Barrasso said.

The United States and Saudi Arabia have spent nearly two decades negotiating an agreement under which Washington would assist Riyadh in developing a civilian nuclear program.

According to two sources familiar with the matter, both the Biden and Trump administrations initially presented the proposal as an incentive for Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with Israel.

After the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks on Israel made normalization significantly more complicated, however, the Trump administration decided to separate the two issues.

Asked about the agreement while traveling in the Philippines on Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio dismissed concerns that the arrangement could contribute to nuclear proliferation.

“The United States will not enter into any agreement with any country that creates a risk of nuclear weapons proliferation,” Rubio said.

In announcing the agreement, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said, “Rest assured, these agreements uphold the highest standards of nuclear security and nuclear nonproliferation.”

Saudi Arabia said in its own statement that the agreement is intended to strengthen cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy “in accordance with the highest international standards for nuclear security, nuclear safety and nuclear nonproliferation.”

For decades, the United States has generally avoided allowing new nuclear cooperation partners to enrich uranium domestically, instead insisting on a no-enrichment commitment known as the “gold standard,” most notably in its 2009 agreement with the United Arab Emirates.

Concerns in Washington have also focused on Saudi Arabia’s refusal to sign the document known as the Additional Protocol.

The protocol is an agreement with the UN’s nuclear watchdog that grants inspectors broader access beyond declared facilities to detect undeclared nuclear activities.

That refusal, combined with Saudi Arabia’s potential enrichment capability, leaves the new agreement well short of the “gold standard” established by the 2009 UAE agreement.

Under that agreement, Abu Dhabi accepted such inspections and renounced the right to enrich uranium or reprocess plutonium on its own territory.

Critics argue that abandoning both commitments marks a departure from the template Washington has relied on for decades to prevent nuclear proliferation.

The United States announced on Wednesday that it had also reached a bilateral safeguards agreement with Saudi Arabia but did not provide further details.

Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin said he was surprised the administration had negotiated an agreement that could permit Riyadh to enrich uranium, unlike previous US nuclear cooperation agreements.

“What concerns me is the enrichment potential of Iran or Saudi Arabia. But I can also envision a scenario in which it is kept completely under control,” Johnson said.

Victoria Coates, who examined whether the United States could sell nuclear technology to Riyadh while serving as a senior official during the first Trump administration, said the agreement carries risks but that “those risks can be mitigated.”

Now serving at the conservative Heritage Foundation, Coates said, “As long as we monitor the situation closely and have clear visibility into what is happening, I think it is a risk worth taking.”

Republican Senator Mike Rounds said he would not object to Saudi Arabia enriching uranium on its own territory depending on the extent of the enrichment permitted under the agreement.

“It depends on how much they enrich the uranium. If it is 60% or less, that is far above what is needed for civilian purposes. But if we are talking only about enrichment to levels that can be used in nuclear power plants, I have no problem with that. Somebody is going to do it, and it is better that we do it than someone else,” Rounds said.

Under the agreement, the United States and Saudi Arabia will jointly study the feasibility of uranium enrichment within the kingdom.

According to two sources familiar with the agreement, if both sides determine such enrichment is acceptable, it would take place under a “black box” arrangement designed to prevent the transfer of sensitive technology to Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia has long sought to establish its own civilian nuclear program. Some analysts argue that cooperation with the United States would be preferable to Riyadh turning to Moscow or Beijing.

Jonathan Panikoff, a former intelligence official now at the Atlantic Council, said, “Without an agreement with the United States, Riyadh would almost certainly have turned to China or Russia, whose agreements would likely not include the restrictions contained in the US deal. But that does not mean the risks associated with this type of agreement are zero.”