US and Saudi Arabia sign nuclear pact that could open the door to enrichment

Verified key facts

• Washington and Riyadh signed a civil nuclear cooperation agreement in July 2026.
• The pact could allow US firms to build an enrichment facility, pending a joint study.
• US Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Abdulaziz bin Salman signed it.
• The agreement is expected to run for 30 years and use American technology.
• Congress can review the deal but would need a veto-proof majority to block it.

The United States and Saudi Arabia have signed a civil nuclear cooperation agreement that both governments call a landmark. The pact opens a path for American technology to power a Saudi nuclear programme. It also revives a long-running debate about whether the kingdom might one day enrich uranium on its own soil.

What was signed

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Abdulaziz bin Salman formally signed the agreement, according to Euronews and NBC News. The deal is expected to last 30 years and relies on American technology to build the programme. Officials say it includes bilateral safeguards intended to guard against weapons development.

The framework could provide for a uranium enrichment facility built by US companies inside Saudi Arabia. That step would depend on a joint study examining whether it is feasible, Al Jazeera reported. In other words, enrichment is not yet agreed, but the door has been left open.

Why enrichment is the sticking point

Uranium enrichment sits at the heart of the controversy. The same centrifuges that produce low-enriched fuel for power reactors can, if pushed further, produce material for a weapon. That dual-use character is why enrichment on foreign soil draws such scrutiny from arms-control experts.

Saudi Arabia has long resisted the strict conditions that some past US partners accepted, under which a country forgoes enrichment entirely. Riyadh argues it should have the same rights as other states that run civilian programmes. Critics counter that a regional rival building an enrichment capability could spur others to follow.

Opposition in Washington

The agreement faces resistance in Congress from members of both parties. Senator Ed Markey issued a statement criticising the terms, arguing the administration had conceded too much on non-proliferation. Lawmakers have raised similar concerns in previous years when versions of a Saudi deal were floated.

Congress will be able to review the agreement. Blocking it, however, would require a veto-proof majority, a high bar that supporters of the deal are betting opponents cannot reach. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the United States would not reach any agreement that risks proliferation.

• The deal could permit a US-built enrichment plant, subject to a joint study.
• Enrichment technology has both civilian and potential military uses.
• Bipartisan lawmakers have voiced non-proliferation concerns.
• Overriding the deal would need a veto-proof congressional majority.

The 123 Agreement framework

Civil nuclear cooperation between the United States and another country is governed by what is known as a 123 Agreement, named for a section of the US Atomic Energy Act. Such pacts set the legal terms for sharing American nuclear technology and material. They are meant to ensure that cooperation stays within peaceful bounds.

In some past agreements, partner states accepted a so-called gold standard, promising not to enrich uranium or reprocess spent fuel. Saudi Arabia has been reluctant to sign up to that condition. The reported terms of the new deal, which leave enrichment open to a future study, mark a departure from that stricter model.

The regional backdrop

The agreement lands amid heightened tension across the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has watched its neighbours closely on nuclear questions for years. Officials in Riyadh have said in the past that the kingdom would seek matching capabilities if a rival crossed the nuclear threshold, a stance that colours every discussion of enrichment.

For Washington, the deal is also about commercial and strategic influence. American reactor and technology firms have competed with rivals from Russia, China and South Korea for Gulf nuclear contracts. Supporters argue it is better for the United States to shape a Saudi programme than to cede that role to others.

The kingdom's push for nuclear power also fits its economic plans. Riyadh has spoken of diversifying away from oil and freeing up more crude for export by generating electricity from other sources. A domestic nuclear industry would serve that ambition while signalling technological advance.

Safeguards and the questions that remain

The two governments point to safeguards as the answer to proliferation worries. The detail of those safeguards will determine how reassuring they prove. Analysts want to know how inspections would work, what limits would apply and whether the joint study on enrichment carries binding conditions.

The administration has not released the full text of the deal. That reticence has frustrated some lawmakers who want to judge the safeguards for themselves. Until the terms are public, assessments rest on official summaries rather than the binding language.

What happens next

Attention now turns to Congress and to the promised feasibility study. The political fight over the agreement will test how far the administration can push a controversial partnership without a formal treaty vote. The outcome will shape not only US-Saudi ties but also the wider norms that govern who may enrich uranium and under what conditions.

Regional powers and non-proliferation bodies will be watching closely. A precedent that loosens the terms for one Gulf state could influence the demands of others. For that reason, the fine print of the safeguards may matter more, in the long run, than the signing ceremony that drew the headlines.

Sources

• Euronews
• NBC News
• Al Jazeera
• CBC News