FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

When Saudi Arabia Gets the Bomb

Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead

On Tuesday, the House Oversight and Reform Committee revealed that, based on the testimony of “multiple” whistleblowers, the Trump Administration has been attempting to rush through a transfer of “highly sensitive U.S. nuclear technology” to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia without Congressional approval in violation of federal law.

Before the Committee’s revelation on Tuesday, we knew that since 2017, the Trump Administration has been in negotiations with the kingdom over a “123 agreement” which would allow American corporations such as Westinghouse to transfer technology to the Saudis for the construction of two nuclear power plants.[1]  These agreements are permitted under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, subject to Congressional approval.

*     *    *     *     *

“Saudi Arabia does not want to acquire any nuclear bomb, but without a doubt if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible.”

—Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman

This alarming remark from the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia came during an interview with the prince which aired on the March 18, 2018 “60 Minutes.”

After Venezuela, Saudi Arabia sits on the largest oil reserves on the planet.  Why does it need nuclear power?  The Saudis give several reasons.  Under his ambitious “Vision 2030” plan, MBS, as the crown prince is known, is out to diversify the Saudi economy and make the kingdom less dependent on oil. The clock is running out on the oil age and the Saudis know it.  As the use of renewables increases worldwide the kingdom intends to export as much oil as it can while demand still exists.  Nuclear power will also help the kingdom meet its own burgeoning demand for energy which is climbing at the brisk rate of 6 to 8 percent per annum.  In addition, Saudi Arabia has environmental concerns. Saudi Arabia ranks ninth in the world in air pollution.  Plus, as Defense One notes, “warming in the Middle East is expected to exceed twice the world average, making the region uninhabitable by mid-century.”  Saudi Arabia needs to get off oil—and fast.

These uses of nuclear power aren’t what’s most troubling.[2]  It’s the possibility that the Saudis will build a bomb.  According to Vox, “some skeptics think the whole energy argument coming out of Riyadh is merely a cover for its military ambitions.”

Even peaceful uses of nuclear power come with proliferation hazards.  As Robert Gleason writes in The Nuclear Terrorist(2014), nuclear power plants are tantamount to factories for making nuclear bomb fuel.  Enriched to 4%, uranium can power a nuclear reactor.  Enriched to 90%, uranium can be used to make a nuclear bomb.  Along with reactors, the Saudis want the tech that will enable them to enrich uranium.  Never mind that the Saudis would find it far cheaper to purchase nuclear fuel from outside the country.  Further, Saudi Arabia refuses to permit “UN inspectors to look anywhere in the country for signs that the Saudis might be working on a bomb….”[3]

The capacity for enrichment and reprocessing will allow “nuclear hedging” by Saudi Arabia against archenemy Iran.[4]  Once it has enrichment and reprocessing facilities, the kingdom can quickly repurpose a peaceful, civil nuclear program to building a bomb.  This is guaranteed to happen if the Saudis believe (or claim they believe) that Iran has resumed work on nuclear weapons.

Other than Iran’s nonexistent nuclear weapons, Trump is alarmingly unconcerned about nuclear proliferation.  Candidate Trump said in 2016 that it was inevitable that Saudi Arabia (and South Korea and Japan) would obtain nuclear weapons. (The really scary thing is that Trump may be right.)

Call the Midwife

On May 24 of last year, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the Trump Administration wants a so-called “gold standard” agreement which would prohibit the Saudis from enriching or reprocessing fissionable material. However, in February 2018, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, who is heading up the negotiations with the Saudis because Trump has been unable to find anyone less qualified to do so, was considering a deal which would allow the Saudis to enrich uranium after 10 to 15 years.

Even before Tuesday, it was unlikely that Congress would approve a 123 agreement with the Saudis.  Both sides of the aisle have cooled appreciably toward the Saudis following Jamal Khashoggi’s murder.  In October, five Republican—Republican!—senators wrote to President Trump asking that he end nuclear talks with the Saudis.  In December, Senators and Representatives from both parties introduced the No Nuclear Weapons for Saudi Arabia Act which mandates the gold standard and reaffirms Congress’ prerogative under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to veto transfer of nuclear tech to the Saudis.  A resolution introduced in the senate on February 12 by members of both parties also prohibits enrichment and reprocessing. It seems that the Administration realized it could not get an agreement past Congress, and so decided to cut Congress out of the picture.

If there is no agreement with the US, the kingdom will have to take its business elsewhere.  Besides the US, Russia, China, South Korea, and France have submitted bids to build Saudi Arabia’s first nuclear reactor.

Trump’s indulgence toward Saudi Arabia’s nuclear ambitions contrasts sharply with his unremitting hostility towards Iran.  The Trump Administration sees Iran as intent on developing nuclear weapons, even as Iran continues to abide by Obama’s 2015 nuclear deal which Trump abandoned on May 8, 2018.  However, the Trump Administration’s tightening stranglehold on Iran through economic sanctions may have the effect of driving the Iranians out of the Obama agreement.  That would hand the Saudis the excuse they need to build a bomb.  Years from now, we may look back on Donald Trump as the midwife of a Saudi nuclear bomb.

It is imperative that Saudi Arabia not be allowed to get nuclear technology.  Commenting in December on the proposed transfer, Representative Brad Sherman, Democrat of California, connected the transfer with the Saudi murder of Jamal Khasshogi, saying:  “A country that can’t be trusted with a bone saw shouldn’t be trusted with nuclear weapons.” Exactly.

Notes.

[1]  According tothe New York Times, the Saudis have shelved earlier plans to build “as many as 16 nuclear power plants over … 20 to 25 years at a cost of $80 billion.”

[2]  Of course, anyone who remembers Fukushima or Three Mile Island is unlikely to be wildly enthusiastic about nuclear power.

[3]  “Moreover, Saudi Arabia has argued that a legal pledge to forgo ENR [enrichment and reprocessing] represents ‘an unacceptable infringement on its national sovereignty.’”  Nicholas L. Miller and Tristan A. Volpe, Abstinence or Tolerance: Managing Nuclear Ambitions in Saudi Arabia, WASHINGTON QUARTERLY, (Summer 2018), pages 36 and 44 n.51.  Saudi Arabia is a firm believer in national sovereignty, as anyone in Yemen will tell you.

[4]  Miller and Volpe, Abstinence or Tolerance, pages 27-29.

More articles by:

Charles Pierson is a lawyer and a member of the Pittsburgh Anti-Drone Warfare Coalition. E-mail him at Chapierson@yahoo.com.

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
November 21, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
Reports of War Crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan Highlight the Failures of Both Wars
Steven Gorelick
Thinking Outside the Grid
William Hartung
America’s Arms Sales Addiction
Michael Welton
Christianity is the Religion of Imperialism
Binoy Kampmark
Letting the Side Down: Prince Andrew, the Royal Family and Jeffrey Epstein
Craig Collins
Open Letter to the People of Planet Earth
David Schultz
The Democratic Party’s Missing Electoral College Game Plan
Norman Solomon
Joe Biden’s AstroTurf Campaign
Bob Lord
Health Care and “Head Taxes”: an Unhealthy Combination
Steve Brown
Why Did MSNBC Spend So Much Time Bashing Gabbard?
Jesse Jackson
The Right to Vote Should not Fall Victim to Partisan Battles
Ted Rall
Billionaires and Corporations Love Anti-SLAPP Laws, Why Does John Oliver?
Priti Gulati Cox
One Pound Capitalism, a Pinch of Democracy, and an Impeachment
Thomas Knapp
Voters Say They Want a Third Party, They Should Vote Accordingly
Jenna Orkin
Overtunring WI v. Yoder: Making Education a Federal Right for All Children (and Bringing the MeToo Movement to Fundamentalist Communities)
November 20, 2019
Vijay Prashad
The Coup in Bolivia Has Everything to Do With the Screen You’re Using to Read This
Kenneth Surin
Labor and the UK General Election
Ron Jacobs
The Trumpists’ Attempts at Snark Define Their Day: Impeachment Day Three
George Ochenski
The Walls are Closing in on Donald Trump
Timothy M. Gill
Towards a Democratic Socialist Foreign Policy
Robert Hunziker
Neoliberalism Backfires
Thomas S. Harrington
Let’s Give Three Cheers for Those “Western Ears” 
Michelle Renee Matisons
Freedom, Valor, Love: On Snowden’s Permanent Record
James C. Nelson
How Trump is Warping the Federal Courts: the Case Against Lawrence VanDyke
Rev. William Alberts
Whistleblowing Religion
Chandra Muzaffar
The Coup That Ousted Morales
Mike Garrity
Trump Administration Ignores Court Order Stopping 85,000 Acre Payette Forest Logging and Burning Project, Conservation Groups Sue
Andrew Moss
Raising the Stakes in the Struggle Over Immigration Detention
Dean Baker
Making Andrew Yang Smarter
Lawrence Wittner
The People of the World
November 19, 2019
Ramzy Baroud
How Western Media Bias Allows Israel to Getaway with Murder in Gaza
Patrick Cockburn
Erdogan’s Ethnic Cleansing of the Kurds is Still Happening
Dave Lindorff
Student Protesters are Walking a Tightrope in Hong Kong
Richard Greeman
French Yellow Vests Celebrate First Birthday, Converge With Planned Labor Strikes
Dean Baker
Impeachment is a Kitchen Table Issue
Walden Bello
Is China an “Imperial Power” in the Image of the West?
Jim Britell
Modern Biology and Ecology: the Roots Of America’s Assertive Illiteracy
Sabri Öncü
Non-Financial Private Debt Overhang
John Steppling
Baby Shark Coup
Binoy Kampmark
Open Guidelines: The Foreign Interference Problem in Australian Universities
Evaggelos Vallianatos
Greece and the Struggle for Freedom
Colin Todhunter
Lab Rats for Corporate Profit: Pesticide Industry’s Poisoned Platter
James Graham
Open Letter to Jeremy Corbyn on the Eve of the Debate
Elliot Sperber
Scrutiny – From Scruta
November 18, 2019
Olivia Arigho-Stiles
Protestors Massacred in Post-Coup Bolivia
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail