Washington: The United States recently signed a nuclear energy cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia, described by the US Department of Energy as historic. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Arabian Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman signed the Section 123 agreement under the Atomic Energy Act, supplemented by a bilateral safeguards agreement. Such agreements typically pave the way for American reactors, American nuclear fuel, and American oversight. However, the agreement has sparked a heated debate because it allegedly allows Saudi Arabia to independently enrich uranium on its own soil, according to several American media outlets.
According to TRTworld.com, the agreement has reignited concerns in the region, especially given the longstanding tensions surrounding nuclear capabilities in the Middle East. For nearly two decades, the architecture built around Tehran's nuclear programme viewed Iran as an isolated problem. However, this perspective has been challenged, as Israel has had an undeclared nuclear arsenal for decades. This new agreement allows Saudi Arabia similar capabilities, which has drawn criticism for promoting a policy of selectivity rather than genuine nonproliferation.
US President Donald Trump addressed the controversy by stating on Truth Social that Saudi Arabia would only receive civilian unenriched nuclear facilities. Yet, the US Department of Energy's official statement does not clarify the issue of uranium enrichment. Publications citing Congressional documents suggest the agreement does leave the possibility open for Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium. In response, Senator Ed Markey introduced the No Nuclear Weapons for Saudi Arabia Act, mandating that Riyadh formally abandon uranium enrichment before the deal takes effect.
The agreement has also prompted a reevaluation of regional security dynamics. Previously, the international focus was on whether Iran would acquire nuclear weapons. Now, with Saudi Arabia's potential uranium enrichment program, Tehran questions why it should adhere to restrictions not imposed on its Gulf rival. Saudi Arabia's mutual defence treaty with nuclear-armed Pakistan further complicates the situation, as it implies nuclear capabilities could be extended to Riyadh if necessary.
The agreement has implications beyond Saudi Arabia and Iran. The United Arab Emirates, with its own 2009 nuclear agreement with Washington, may seek to renegotiate its terms if Saudi Arabia secures better conditions. This chain reaction could lead to proliferation across the region, with each state demanding equal terms. Trkiye, with its own civilian nuclear strategy, cannot ignore these developments.
The situation highlights the need for a unified regional security architecture rather than individual bilateral deals. In 2010, Turkiye and Brazil attempted such an approach with the Tehran Declaration, advocating for peaceful nuclear technology through verifiable exchanges. Although deemed insufficient at the time, this approach may be relevant today to avoid unilateral pressure and unequal deals.
The US-Saudi nuclear agreement could significantly alter the regional balance of power. It underscores the importance of a collective, verifiable system to manage nuclear capabilities fairly and equitably across the Middle East, ensuring stability and reducing the risk of proliferation.