The Trump administration‘s nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia has sparked a heated debate in the US Congress. Lawmakers are questioning the potential risks of exporting nuclear technology to the Middle Eastern kingdom, drawing parallels to historical mistakes.
At a recent House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman from Los Angeles voiced his concerns, suggesting that exporting nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia could be a significant misstep, reminiscent of arming the Shah of Iran in the 1970s.
Historical Parallels and Future Uncertainties
Sherman highlighted the unpredictable nature of political regimes, stating, “Everything the Shah had in 1978 was in the mullahs’ hands in 1979.” He emphasized the uncertainty of who will be running Saudi Arabia in the future, underscoring the need for caution.
The congressman also pointed out that in 2018, he and then-Senator Marco Rubio introduced the “No Nuclear Weapons for Saudi Arabia Act.” This legislation aimed to require congressional approval before the US could enter into a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia. Additionally, it called for a Saudi investigation into the death of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, whose murder was linked to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Nonproliferation Safeguards and Hypocrisy Concerns
Sherman argued that Congress should only approve the deal if it includes what he termed “the same gold-standard safeguards as our deal with the UAE.” He referred to a 2009 agreement with the United Arab Emirates, where the UAE voluntarily committed to nonproliferation and agreed not to pursue domestic uranium enrichment and reprocessing.
Sherman questioned the hypocrisy of the situation, asking, “Is there any reason we should be bombing Iran because they won’t agree to limit their nuclear program while telling Saudi Arabia we give them the green light and they don’t even have to agree to these additional inspections?” He suggested that there is “great hypocrisy here,” pointing out that Saudi Arabia is not agreeing to the additional inspections that could ensure their program is not used to develop nuclear weapons.
Sherman predicted that someone would introduce a resolution of disapproval, inviting members of the committee who have worked to prevent nuclear weapons in the Middle East from non-democratic countries to join in that effort. This remark was an oblique reference to the open secret that one nation in the region, Israel, already possesses nuclear weapons.
Senator Bernie Sanders’ Opposition
Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, also expressed strong opposition to the Trump administration’s deal to help Saudi Arabia enrich uranium for nuclear energy. Sanders wrote on social media, “Trump claims his war on Iran is about stopping an authoritarian country from enriching nuclear fuel. Now he’s letting his best friends in Saudi Arabia — one of the most brutal dictatorships in the world — do exactly that. This is absurd. No nuclear for the Saudi dictatorship.”
The Trump administration signed a nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia that could enable the kingdom to enrich its own uranium for nuclear reactors. US Energy Secretary Chris Wright announced the agreement, stating that it lays the legal foundation for a decades-long, multi-billion-dollar partnership that advances several priority economic and strategic objectives, including nuclear nonproliferation.
However, the question of what those safeguards look like, given the potential for enriched uranium to be used to make nuclear weapons, will be closely scrutinized when the agreement is sent to Congress for review.
