A proposed nuclear cooperation agreement between the United States and Saudi Arabia is facing criticism from Democratic lawmakers and non-proliferation experts, who say the deal lacks the strongest safeguards designed to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.
The concerns emerged after a U.S. State Department letter revealed that the agreement would not require Saudi Arabia to adopt the toughest international inspection standards that several lawmakers had pushed for.
The administration of President Donald Trump has been pursuing a civil nuclear partnership with Saudi Arabia, arguing the deal would strengthen economic ties and support the American nuclear industry.
However, critics fear the agreement could increase security risks in the Middle East.
Concerns
Non-proliferation advocates have long expressed unease about Saudi Arabia’s nuclear ambitions, particularly after Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman previously said the Kingdom would seek nuclear weapons if Iran developed them.
In March, a group of 12 Democratic lawmakers wrote to Secretary of State Marco Rubio urging the administration to insist that Saudi Arabia adopt stricter oversight measures backed by the United Nation's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The lawmakers wanted Riyadh to agree to an additional UN protocol that allows inspectors to conduct surprise visits at undeclared nuclear sites and grants broader monitoring powers.
But a State Department letter dated 18 May sent to Democratic Senator Edward Markey said the proposed agreement would instead rely on a less demanding bilateral safeguards arrangement between Washington and Riyadh.
‘Gold standard’ protections absent
The lawmakers had also called for Saudi Arabia to accept the so-called “gold standard” non-proliferation rules.
Those measures would prevent the Kingdom from enriching uranium or reprocessing nuclear waste - two processes that can potentially be used to produce material for nuclear weapons.
The United Arab Emirates accepted those conditions in 2009 before developing its own nuclear energy programme.
Rubio himself had previously supported applying the same standard to Saudi Arabia during his time in the Senate.
However, the newly disclosed letter makes no reference to such restrictions.
Agreement nearing completion
According to the letter, written by senior State Department legislative affairs official Paul Guaglianone, the agreement is currently in its “final review” stage before being signed by Trump.
Guaglianone said the pact would create the basis for a “decades-long, multi-billion-dollar civil nuclear partnership” between the two countries and support strategic and economic interests.
The White House has not said when Trump is expected to formally sign the agreement.
The State Department declined to discuss specific details while the review process continues but insisted the draft includes all legally required conditions and reflects a shared commitment to nuclear safety and non-proliferation standards.
Saudi Arabia’s embassy in Washington has not publicly commented on the proposal.
Sharp criticism from lawmakers
Markey accused the Trump administration of weakening U.S. national security by moving forward without stronger safeguards.
“Trump is giving nuclear-weapon-wannabe Saudi Arabia nuclear technology without the strongest safeguards,” he said in a statement.
Under U.S. law, once Trump signs the agreement and submits it to Congress, lawmakers will have 90 days to block it through formal resolutions. If Congress takes no action, the agreement will automatically come into force.
Henry Sokolski, Executive Director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Centre, warned that allowing countries to enrich uranium could create long-term risks.
“If you let a country make nuclear fuel, you’d better hope they are your friend forever,” he said.
Read more:
What is your opinion on this topic?
Leave the first comment