Washington has reached a watershed civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia, the U.S. Energy Department announced Wednesday, which could pave the way for uranium enrichment in the kingdom.
Details of the deal are sparse, though what the Trump Administration has described as a “decades-long, multi-billion-dollar” partnership is subject to review by Congress, which could oppose it over its potential to start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
The U.S. and Saudi Arabia have been working on the deal for years, both during Donald Trump’s first presidency and that of his successor, Joe Biden. The Wall Street Journal first reported that Trump formally approved the deal last week.
The deal also comes as the Trump Administration continues to pressure Saudi Arabia’s longstanding regional rival Iran to give up its enriched uranium stockpiles and curb the development of its nuclear program. Iran has repeatedly insisted that its nuclear program is peaceful.
Saudi Arabia has long pushed for building a domestic uranium enrichment facility as part of any nuclear cooperation deal with the U.S. Critics and nonproliferation groups, however, have warned that such a deal could facilitate Saudi Arabia’s development of a nuclear weapon.
U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who signed the deal with Saudi Minister of Energy Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, sought to allay those worries. “Rest assured, 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.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio similarly added earlier that the U.S. “is not going to reach any agreement with any country in the world that leads to the risk of proliferation.”
How did we get here?
Saudi Arabia is an oil-rich nation, but Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has stated ambitions for the country to expand its energy generation portfolio beyond fossil fuels. Developing a nuclear power program, Saudi officials have argued, could free up more oil supply and boost exports.
Abdulaziz said in 2019 that the country aims to “go for the full cycle, from producing uranium, to enriching uranium, using the uranium, even acquiring the technologies.” He also said in January 2023 that Saudi Arabia plans to use its resources for producing low-enriched uranium.
Talks between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia have been going on for some time: under the Biden Administration, a civil nuclear cooperation deal was envisioned as part of a broader one that would include formalizing diplomatic relations between Riyadh and Israel. The Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel by Hamas and the ensuing conflict, however, made the deal elusive.
In November 2025, when bin Salman visited Trump at the White House, the U.S. and Riyadh completed negotiations on the legal foundation for a nuclear energy partnership.
What’s in the deal?
On Wednesday, the Energy Department announced that Wright and Abdulaziz signed a peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement, known as a “123 agreement”, and a bilateral safeguards agreement. The 123 agreement, the department claims, “provides great access for American companies in the Saudi nuclear energy program, benefiting American industry, workers, and supply chains while helping to meet Saudi energy needs.”
Congress is expected to know the finer details soon, but some of the core provisions have been reported. The deal, which is expected to last 30 years, would put U.S. companies front and center to develop Saudi Arabia’s nuclear infrastructure. This could include a uranium enrichment facility that could be built if a two-year joint U.S.-Saudi study determines that enrichment in Saudi Arabia is warranted and commercially viable. If, after the study, the U.S. rejects pushing through with indigenous enrichment, Saudi Arabia would, according to the Wall Street Journal, not be allowed to enrich independently or with another foreign partner for 10 years.
A deal with Riyadh could limit the U.S.’s competitors China and Russia from having deep stakes in Saudi Arabia, which has actively engaged with those countries in nuclear development. According to the Journal, Trump Administration officials say that the U.S.’s role would prevent diverting enriched uranium for military purposes and spent reactor fuel from being reprocessed for creating a bomb.
While no awards have been publicly announced, reports from the Journal and the New York Times say one of the biggest beneficiaries would be Westinghouse, which designs nuclear reactors sold overseas. During a House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing Wednesday, Rep. Brad Sherman (D, Calif.) said that “Westinghouse stands to make an awful lot of money on this deal.”
On Thursday morning, Trump posted on Truth Social that the nuclear deal “is totally subject to Saudi Arabia joining the very respected and successful Abraham Accords.” Trump has been pushing countries in the Middle East to sign onto the set of agreements that aim to normalize Arab nations’ diplomatic relations with Israel, though Saudi Arabia has resisted signing the accords, insisting on Palestinian statehood first. The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed Trump’s condition for the deal, calling it “an historic leap forward for peace in the Middle East.”
The U.S. President in his post also reasserted that the deal would not allow the enrichment of atomic material.
Why is the deal controversial?
Some, however, have sounded the alarm on allowing a Middle Eastern country to potentially enrich uranium, as it could destabilize an already volatile region.
The U.S. has a 123 agreement with Saudi Arabia’s regional neighbor, the United Arab Emirates, though in the 2009 deal it agreed to forgo enriching uranium domestically or reprocessing the spent atomic fuel. This has since become known as the “gold standard” for civilian nuclear cooperation.
But Saudi Arabia has rejected the “gold standard” commitment. Bin Salman has previously said that if Iran were to develop a nuclear bomb, the kingdom would follow suit—despite Saudi Arabia having ratified the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1988.
During the first-term Trump Administration, legislation introduced by Sen. Ed Markey (D, Mass.) and then-Senator Rubio (R, Fla.), wanted to block civilian nuclear cooperation with Saudi Arabia unless Congress voted to approve it. Markey introduced a similar bill earlier this year.
Such 123 agreements usually take effect unless Congress jointly disapproves the deal and a two-thirds majority vote to override a presidential veto.
Some lawmakers have already sounded the alarm on the U.S.-Saudi Arabia deal. House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Rep. Gregory Meeks (D, N.Y.) posted on social media that, as reported, the deal elicits “deep concerns.” Meeks said the accord must include “appropriate limits on enrichment and reprocessing,” as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Additional Protocol, which grants the agency access to inspect and investigate to ensure peaceful use of nuclear material. The Obama-era nuclear deal with Iran, from which Trump withdrew in 2018, required the protocol.
The deal, as reported, sets a “terrible” precedent for nonproliferation, according to Kelsey Davenport, director for Nonproliferation Policy at the Arms Control Association. Davenport posted on social media that a bespoke accord “risks other supplier states, say Russia, negotiating similar bilateral arrangements, rather than letting the IAEA do the job it’s designed to do.”
Bonnie Jenkins, former U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control and international security during the Biden Administration, pointed out what she sees as the U.S.’s hypocrisy.
“In all the regional chaos and the failed efforts to come to another Iran nonproliferation nuclear deal, we are agreeing to a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia,” Jenkins said in a statement on social media. “It is not clear that there is a strategy for the region and a way forward for nuclear nonproliferation.”
