The arms race is an Israeli pretext ready to object to U.S.-Saudi nuclear cooperation.
Afrasianet - U.S. President Donald Trump was just announcing a historic agreement for civil nuclear cooperation with Saudi Arabia, and he was quick to send a message of reassurance to Israel, stressing that the completion of the agreement will remain linked to Riyadh's accession to the Abraham Accords, in an attempt to contain expected Israeli objections to granting the kingdom a nuclear program that uses American technology and allows uranium enrichment under tight controls.
Trump said in a post on Truth Social that the deal "will be approved, but that depends on Saudi Arabia joining the prestigious and successful Abraham Accords," adding that the United States "is not opposed to unenriched civilian nuclear facilities," a reference aimed at emphasizing that Washington has no intention of opening the door to the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region.
This link reveals that the US administration views the agreement not only as an energy project, but also as a political card to rearrange regional balances, combining strengthening the strategic partnership with Saudi Arabia, maintaining Israeli supremacy, and reviving the normalization path that was stalled by the war in Gaza and Riyadh's condition for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Although the Israeli government did not issue an official position immediately after the agreement was announced, objections to any Saudi nuclear program were expected even before its details were revealed. Israel, which is believed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East, is based on a security doctrine that considers maintaining its qualitative superiority a prerequisite for its security, and refuses to give any country in the region strategic capabilities that could change the balance of power in the future.
Tel Aviv uses the pretext of fearing a nuclear arms race, even though the announced agreement is limited to a civilian program governed by U.S. and international non-proliferation guarantees. Observers say these concerns reflect in part Israel's eagerness to retain its monopoly on advanced nuclear technology rather than an objection to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
Prominent Israeli voices have already begun to voice this concern. Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett called the deal a "serious strategic failure" because it allows uranium to be enriched inside Saudi territory, warning that it could lead to a nuclear race in the region.
Former Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said that Saudi Arabia's civilian nuclear program could turn into a military program in the future, calling on the Israeli government to exert pressure on the US Congress to prevent the agreement from passing. Former Defense Minister Benny Gantz also argued that any nuclear cooperation with Riyadh should be part of a broader regional alliance that includes Israel, rather than a separate bilateral agreement.
The challenges to the agreement are not limited to the Israeli position, as it is also awaiting a test in the US Congress, where lawmakers from both parties have expressed reservations about allowing Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium, fearing that this would allow the kingdom to have a nuclear fuel cycle that could be used in the future for military purposes, even if it is currently committed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders also criticized the deal, considering it contradicting the US administration's justifications in dealing with the Iranian nuclear file, saying that Washington cannot oppose uranium enrichment in Iran and then allow it in Saudi Arabia.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stressed that the United States "will never conclude an agreement that would lead to the risk of nuclear proliferation," stressing that cooperation with Riyadh would be subject to strict legal and regulatory safeguards that prevent the conversion of nuclear technology into a military program.
These safeguards are based on Article 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, which regulates nuclear cooperation agreements with foreign countries and imposes strict requirements related to international oversight and prohibits the use of U.S. technology to develop nuclear weapons or transfer sensitive materials to third parties.
For Washington, the agreement is not limited to the security dimension, but also carries economic and geopolitical dimensions. As part of its Vision 2030, Saudi Arabia seeks to diversify energy sources, reduce dependence on oil for electricity production, and provide more crude for export, while meeting the growing demand for electricity and water desalination.
The deal also allows U.S. companies to compete for multibillion-dollar contracts to build Saudi nuclear reactors, while ensuring that the kingdom's nuclear program remains within a framework of U.S. transparency and oversight, rather than giving way to competitors such as China, Russia, South Korea, or France.
The administration understands that stalling the deal will not necessarily mean Riyadh abandoning its nuclear project, but may even push it to seek other partners that are less hawkish in their political and technical terms, which could reduce U.S. influence in one of the Gulf's most strategically sensitive sectors.
Trump seems eager to market the deal as part of his broader project to reshape alliances in the Middle East, rather than just a trade deal or technical cooperation. Tying the deal to normalization is intended to reassure Israel that Washington will not give Saudi Arabia a free strategic gain, but will seek to use it to advance a regional path that serves U.S. interests and strengthens the network of partnerships that began with the Abraham Accords.
Ultimately, the U.S.-Saudi nuclear deal goes beyond being an energy project to a test of a complex regional equation that the Trump administration is trying to formulate. It seeks to strengthen its partnership with Riyadh, maintain Israeli supremacy, and prevent the expansion of China and Russia in the Gulf nuclear energy sector, while keeping the Saudi program under U.S. oversight.
Among these intertwined considerations, the real battle for the deal in the coming months appears to be in the U.S. Congress, and in the administration's ability to convince Israel that nuclear cooperation with Saudi Arabia will not be at the expense of its security or strategic standing in the region.
How did Trump overthrow the Saudi nuclear deal less than 24 hours after it was signed?
Trump's post on Truth Social on Thursday morning surprised Saudis, who considered the nuclear deal — which did not include the normalization clause — a major victory.
And why did US President Donald Trump turn the Saudi nuclear deal on its head less than 24 hours after it was signed? And what condition overthrew the agreement? Is uranium enriched allowed?
The answer is in an article published by the CNN Today.
The following is the text of the article:
On Wednesday afternoon, officials gathered at the Department of Energy's headquarters in downtown Washington for an event that took more than two decades to prepare: the signing of a civilian nuclear agreement between the United States and Saudi Arabia.
Two sets of American and Saudi flags were placed on the podium and on the table where Energy Secretary Chris Wright was sitting. His Saudi counterpart from Riyadh was shown on a large screen. After months of delay, the agreement was finally signed.
The Saudis achieved most of what they hoped for in this deal, but the deal quickly collapsed after it was announced. On Thursday morning, Trump stated in a social media post that the agreement was conditional on a new condition: Saudi Arabia's accession to the Abraham Accords. Trump also denied that the deal allowed uranium enrichment.
According to a source familiar with the matter, the president was already angry about the disclosure of the deal, which Wright did not tell Trump he would announce, and Trump's frustration worsened, according to sources on CNN, after a wave of criticism from experts and conservative media.
This included skeptical coverage on his favorite channel, Fox News, and on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, which questioned why the deal was struck in the absence of a normalization agreement, something that both media outlets clearly indicated President Joe Biden was seeking.
Two sources familiar with the matter told CNN that the new condition, which the White House insisted had long been Trump's target and should not shock anyone, surprised the administration's own negotiators, for whom the Abraham Accords clause was unexpected.
As confusion grew, White House officials pointed the finger at their Energy Department colleagues, according to one source, who reported that the White House asked the Department of Energy not to bring up the agreement on Wednesday, but Wright, who White House officials had previously complained about overstepping his limits, moved forward anyway, including in an interview on Fox Business Channel.
The deal did not go through, according to some Trump aides, because the letters required to send it to Congress had not yet been sent. The source added that the president and many of his top staff were very angry about the decision to put the deal out.
The White House's anger grew when questions about the deal dominated Thursday's press conference. Carolyn Levitt noted that Trump was the "final dealmaker" when asked why the new clause was not included in Wednesday's announcement.
The new condition, which the White House insisted had long been Trump's target and should not shock anyone, surprised the administration's negotiators themselves
Trump's post on Truth Social on Thursday morning surprised the Saudis, who considered the nuclear deal — which did not include the normalization clause — a major victory. The deal allows uranium to be enriched on Saudi soil once certain conditions are met, while limiting the ability of a U.N. agency to inspect suspected secret nuclear sites.
A source familiar with the matter said energy officials believe they got Trump's approval late last week, and the department has begun its long-planned media campaign.
Another source noted that while Trump may have blessed a "tentative" deal, it was not a green light to complete or unveil the deal.
The initial expert reaction to the declared provisions of the Convention was largely negative. Nuclear non-proliferation experts were concerned about the enrichment clause of the Convention, as well as its failure to abide by the safeguards of the Enhanced Additional Protocol.
Proponents focused on the commercial benefits and strategic calculations of the deal: The Saudis want a nuclear program on their terms, and the United States should cooperate with Riyadh and gain influence over Saudi nuclear safety and nonproliferation practices lest China or Russia interfere.
Criticism initially dissuaded the administration, which argued that the agreement and its bilateral safeguards "uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and nuclear nonproliferation," and the Energy Department continued the official signing ceremony on Wednesday.
After things changed the next morning, many close to the administration immediately suspected a belated intervention by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is known for his skepticism of the Saudi nuclear program.
Two Israeli sources told CNN that Netanyahu had hoped to influence the deal, and one added that the prime minister intended to pressure Trump to include normalization with Riyadh — or at least make progress toward it — as part of the deal.
But the White House later said that Trump and Netanyahu had not spoken — "not to my knowledge," Levitt told reporters — and that Trump was simply reaffirming an old position on Riyadh's normalization of diplomatic relations with Israel.
According to people familiar with the matter, conservative media coverage had a significant impact on the president's decision to block the agreement in its current form.
The Wall Street Journal, known for being skeptical of Trump, wrote on Thursday: "This deal has its roots in the Biden administration, which has offered nuclear cooperation as a reward for the Saudis to join the Abraham Accords. Riyadh has resisted pressure to do so, but its reward now comes from the Trump administration anyway. One can only hope that the Saudis have offered something more."
Fox News, at the start of the 7 a.m. broadcast, expressed similar skepticism. Host Brian Kilmeade called the deal "a bit of a surprise" and noted that such an arrangement was on the table during Biden's presidency.
"During the Biden years, they said we'd think about it," said Kilmeade, who seemed surprised. But before we do that, we need you to sign the Abraham Accords," because Prince Mohammed bin Salman had a much better relationship with Trump than his predecessor.
Kylie McEnany, another Fox News anchor who served as press secretary during Trump's first term, also questioned whether Saudi-Israeli normalization was being ruled out.
"When I was leaving the first Trump administration, I was told that we were very close to normalizing relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia," she said.
________________
