The Trump administration signed a peaceful nuclear cooperation pact with Saudi Arabia, granting a pathway to uranium enrichment while mandating American reactor suppliers.
A U.S.-Saudi Agreement and Its Provisions
On Wednesday, the United States Energy Department announced a peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement, known as a 123 agreement, alongside a bilateral safeguards agreement. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Abdulaziz signed the pact, which is expected to last 30 years.
The accord puts American corporations front and center to develop Saudi Arabia’s nuclear infrastructure and supply its reactors. Crucially, the agreement includes a pathway to a uranium enrichment facility. This facility could be built if a two-year joint U.S.-Saudi study determines that enrichment within the kingdom is warranted and commercially viable. If the United States rejects indigenous enrichment after the study, Saudi Arabia would be barred from enriching independently or with another foreign partner for 10 years.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright defended the pact on social media, stating that the agreement would boost the American economy, strengthen national security, and uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and nonproliferation,
as noted by BBC.
Political Backlash and Regional Proliferation Concerns
Despite administration defense, the deal immediately triggered fierce criticism from lawmakers and regional politicians. Critics argue that exporting enrichment capabilities undermines longstanding U.S. nonproliferation goals and threatens regional stability.
Similar skepticism echoed through the U.S. Congress. Democratic Representative Ro Khanna of California told BBC that the deal really is a giveaway to the Saudis, and it’s only going to fuel further ambitions from Iran.
Khanna added that the pact would only further destabilise the region with Israel
and concluded that it’s just not smart policy.
The administration added to the skepticism by not immediately releasing detailed information about the agreement on Wednesday. Notably, President Trump did not preside over the official signing ceremony, instead attending a dignified transfer ceremony for four U.S. service members killed in Iran before addressing a rally in Georgia, according to BBC.
The IAEA Inspection Standpoint in Iran
Meanwhile, parallel negotiations involving Iran and the United Nations nuclear watchdog face severe verification hurdles. The central test of whether recent U.S.-Iran talks will succeed hinges on whether Tehran will grant inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency access to its atomic facilities, according to analysis from foxnews.com.
David Albright, a physicist and president of the Institute for Science and International Security, told foxnews.com that the IAEA comes up short
in securing robust verification because Iran has not cooperated for twenty years.
Albright added that Tehran loves to generate plans of action that can be extended,
turning verification into a pointless exercise.
Conflicting statements from Tehran compound these doubts. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs denied reports that it had invited the IAEA to inspect its facilities. Furthermore, a report from the Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs Kazem Gharibabadi stating that there is no plan for access to the facilities that were attacked or to the nuclear materials,
adding that no meeting occurred with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi in Switzerland despite requests.
Conversely, IAEA Director Rafael Grossi told reporters in Japan that a Memorandum of Understanding signed by President Donald Trump and Iranian President Pezeshkian explicitly indicates that the nuclear sector will be monitored by the agency. Grossi confirmed that initial conversations have begun, stating, We hope to be there soon.
However, experts like Albright point out that Israel has identified ten or more suspected nuclear weapons sites, leaving it unclear whether inspectors will gain access to those sensitive locations.
