US, Saudi Arabia sign nuclear deal as critics raise security concerns

The United States and Saudi Arabia have signed a civil nuclear agreement and sent it to Congress for review. The pact has triggered debate over oversight, enrichment rights and regional proliferation risks.

In Short

• Chris Wright and Prince Abdulaziz signed the 123 Agreement in Washington
• The pact includes a bilateral safeguards deal and now goes to Congress
• Earlier Biden-era talks had sought broader IAEA inspections through an Additional Protocol

The United States and Saudi Arabia have signed a civil nuclear cooperation agreement that will allow Riyadh to pursue nuclear power development using American technology, marking a major step in long-running talks between the two countries on energy and strategic cooperation.

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman signed the agreement, known as a 123 Agreement, along with a bilateral safeguards agreement, according to the US Department of Energy. The deal will now move to the US Congress for review and approval.

The US Energy Department said the agreement aims to expand American nuclear technology exports, create jobs, promote long-term economic growth and strengthen the strategic partnership between Washington and Riyadh.

“These agreements uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and nonproliferation, while relying on the world’s best nuclear technology and scientists, designed right here in the United States,” Wright said in a statement.

He added that the agreement reflected a shared commitment between the two countries to strengthen commercial ties, support economic growth and improve security cooperation.

The agreement comes after years of negotiations under both former US President Donald Trump’s first administration and the administration of former President Joe Biden. A previous US effort under the Biden administration had sought stronger safeguards, including an Additional Protocol that would have allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to conduct more extensive inspections.

Unlike the earlier proposal, the current agreement does not include such an Additional Protocol. Critics have raised concerns over the extent of oversight and the possibility that nuclear technology could contribute to broader proliferation risks.

The deal also allows Saudi Arabia to pursue uranium enrichment and nuclear waste reprocessing activities, which are considered sensitive areas because they can potentially provide pathways to developing nuclear weapons capabilities.

Saudi Arabia has consistently said its nuclear programme is intended for peaceful purposes. However, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has previously stated that the kingdom would seek nuclear weapons if Iran were to develop them, raising concerns among some lawmakers and experts about a potential nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

The United Arab Emirates, which signed a similar civil nuclear agreement with the US in 2009, agreed to permanently forgo uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities as part of that arrangement.

The US administration has defended the Saudi agreement, saying it complies with the nonproliferation requirements of the US Atomic Energy Act and maintains strict safety standards. Saudi Arabia has argued that if it cannot partner with the United States, it could seek cooperation with countries such as China or Russia, which follow different nuclear oversight standards.

The agreement will face congressional scrutiny before it can take effect. Under US law, Congress has a review period during which lawmakers can object to the deal. A successful challenge would require sufficient votes to override a presidential veto.

Several Democratic lawmakers have criticised the agreement, warning that it could increase nuclear risks in the region. They have urged the administration to ensure stronger safeguards before allowing Saudi Arabia access to advanced nuclear capabilities.

The pact represents a significant expansion of US-Saudi cooperation but is expected to remain a subject of debate over security, oversight and nonproliferation concerns.

- Ends
With inputs from Reuters