Trump Administration Sends Saudi Nuclear Deal to Congress for Review
The prospect that the kingdom could enrich uranium has drawn opposition from Democrats and revived concerns about nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
8 Comments
Folks, a nuclear agreement can strengthen an alliance, but only if it strengthens the rules that keep dangerous technology from spreading. The prospect of Saudi enrichment deserves real scrutiny, because diplomacy is not measured by the photograph at the signing ceremony, it is measured by whether the next generation inherits a safer Middle East. Congress should insist on enforceable safeguards, transparency, and accountability, not simply take the administration's assurances on faith.
Democrats screaming about nuclear proliferation now is rich. These are the same people who cheered Obama handing Iran a path to enrichment with pallets of cash and called it statesmanship. Saudi Arabia is a Sunni counterweight to Iran, they've been asking for civilian nuclear capacity for years, and sending it to Congress for review is exactly how this is supposed to work constitutionally. NYT buries that part and leads with "opposition from Democrats" like that's supposed to scare someone. The kingdom enriching uranium for domestic energy use is not the same thing as a weapons program, and anyone conflating the two is either ignorant or pushing a narrative. Congressional review, full transparency, no secret side deals. That's more than Obama gave anyone with his Iran agreement. But sure, trust the Times to frame accountability as the problem.
Dave, sending this agreement to Congress is appropriate, because Saudi enrichment is not a technical footnote when the Middle East is already under severe strategic pressure. I am sorry, but assurances from either party cannot substitute for verifiable safeguards, and I never want to be disconnected from the facts.
Every proliferation framework built since 1968 rests on one assumption: enrichment capability stays with established nuclear states or highly verified partners. Saudi Arabia is neither.
What changes when a kingdom that executed 81 people in a single day in 2022 controls the front end of a fuel cycle? Ask yourself that question slowly.
J
Congress should examine every comma before anyone celebrates a diplomatic trophy. Saudi Arabia may be an important partner, but uranium enrichment is not a trust exercise. Democrats are right to worry about proliferation, and Republicans should be just as careful about giving the president credit before seeing the safeguards.
More to rate
- Trump DOJ sues Kansas school district over 'secret gender transitions'WASHINGTONEXAMINER · 10 ratings
- Miami doctor pleads fifth as Congress probes birth tourism industryNEWSWEEK · 9 ratings
- Postal Service plans may keep voters from getting ballots, whistleblower saysTHE WASHINGTON POST · 1 ratings
- Full list of Republicans publicly breaking with Trump on AI data centersNEWSWEEK · 9 ratings
- Rising Dem Star Fires Back At JD Vance’s Outrage Over Wife Dig And Points Finger At TrumpHUFFPOST · 8 ratings
- House Censures Republican Accused of Sexually Harassing Two AidesTHE NEW YORK TIMES · 5 ratings
Giving Saudi Arabia uranium enrichment rights while simultaneously handing Iran $300 billion is the kind of bipartisan nuclear proliferation strategy that makes you wonder if the goal was always to see who builds a warhead first, with the winner getting a Trump-branded casino.
Proliferating nukes across the most volatile region on earth just to prove he can out-deal Obama is peak Trump, and Congress rubber-stamping a Saudi enrichment program while the ink is barely dry on the Iran giveaway tells you everything about what "America First" actually means.
The casino line is good but the bipartisan framing lets too many people off the hook. This is a Trump production start to finish. Congressional Republicans who spent years screaming about the Obama deal are now going to quietly vote through enrichment rights for a country that murdered a Washington Post journalist and has funded extremism across the region for decades. That's not bipartisan dysfunction, that's one party abandoning every principle it claimed to hold the second their guy is the one making the deal.
The Iran $300 billion is genuinely baffling to me. We sanctioned them into submission and then handed them more than Obama ever dreamed of giving, and half the people who called Obama's deal treason are treating this like a win. And now we're telling the Saudis they get enrichment capability on top of it. MBS is sitting in Riyadh right now absolutely thrilled with how this decade is going for him.
I'm not even reflexively anti-Saudi engagement, there's a real argument for it as a counterweight to Iran. But you do one or the other. You don't do both simultaneously and call it strategy.