Saudi-US Nuclear Deal Sparks Middle East Arms Race Concerns

A proposed civil nuclear cooperation agreement between the United States and Saudi Arabia that could permit uranium enrichment within the kingdom has intensified concerns about a potential nuclear arms race in the Middle East, even as Riyadh presses ahead with plans to diversify its energy mix. According to congressional documents and arms control experts, the draft framework under discussion may allow Saudi Arabia to develop some level of domestic enrichment capability under international safeguards, raising questions about long-term regional stability and global nonproliferation norms.

The proposed agreement would fall under a Section 123 civil nuclear cooperation pact, enabling the transfer of American nuclear technology in exchange for safeguards and compliance commitments. Any such arrangement would involve oversight by the International Atomic Energy Agency , the Vienna-based body responsible for verifying that nuclear activities remain peaceful. Saudi Arabia is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty , which allows peaceful nuclear energy development but prohibits the pursuit of atomic weapons by non-nuclear-weapon states. Experts say the strength of inspection mechanisms particularly whether Riyadh adopts the IAEA’s Additional Protocol permitting more intrusive monitoring will be central to assessing the deal’s credibility.

Saudi officials maintain that their nuclear ambitions are rooted in economic and energy priorities. Under Vision 2030 reforms spearheaded by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman , the kingdom aims to reduce reliance on oil by expanding alternative energy sources, including nuclear power, to meet rising domestic demand and preserve crude exports. However, the crown prince’s earlier assertion that Saudi Arabia would seek a nuclear weapon if Iran acquires one has fueled apprehension among nonproliferation advocates, who argue that enrichment technology though legal under the NPT significantly lowers the technical threshold to weaponisation.

Regional dynamics further complicate the debate. Tensions between Washington and Tehran remain high over Iran’s nuclear activities, which include enrichment levels approaching weapons-grade purity. Iran insists its programme is peaceful and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has cited a religious edict against nuclear weapons, yet Western governments remain wary. Analysts say that if Saudi Arabia gains enrichment rights, it could intensify strategic rivalry and prompt other regional powers to reassess their own nuclear options, heightening fears of competitive proliferation.

Israel , widely believed to be the Middle East’s only nuclear-armed state, has not publicly endorsed the proposal but is expected to monitor developments closely, given its longstanding security doctrine of maintaining qualitative military superiority. Observers suggest that any perceived erosion of Israel’s strategic edge could trigger quiet diplomatic engagement or recalibration of regional alignments.

The debate also draws comparisons with the United Arab Emirates , which signed a US nuclear agreement without seeking domestic enrichment rights and built the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant under comprehensive safeguards. That arrangement has often been described as the “gold standard” for peaceful nuclear cooperation. Critics argue that permitting Saudi enrichment could weaken that precedent and dilute long-standing efforts to universalise strict nonproliferation benchmarks.

Supporters of the proposed pact contend that anchoring Saudi Arabia’s nuclear programme within a US-backed framework subject to IAEA monitoring would provide greater transparency than leaving Riyadh to pursue alternative suppliers. Ultimately, analysts say, the fine print including limits on enrichment levels, fuel stockpiles and inspection access will determine whether the agreement reinforces the global nonproliferation regime or risks accelerating nuclear competition in an already volatile region.