By Kennedy Maize
Is the Trump administration trying to hide from the public the details of its groundbreaking and controversial July 22 proposed U.S.-Saudi Arabia nuclear power cooperative deal?
The administration has now sent a package to Congress for ratification, as required by law. Unlike the case with past similar agreements, the administration has so far refused to reveal the text of the agreement and its side deals, as Congress has 90 consecutive legislative days (which could be far longer than 90 calendar days) to review the deal.
The Saudi deal is intensly controversial because it is said to include provisions allowing the Saudis to enrich uranium, the first and crucial step toward a nuclear weapons program. The administration has never denied that the deal includes enrichment, but insists that it would occur under strict U.S. supervision, although apparently not through the International Atomic Energy Agency. According to multiple media accounts, the agreement calls for a two-year study of American companies building an enrichment plant in Saudi Arabia.
It isn’t clear where the uranium to be enriched would originate, although it would not be from the United States. Ironically, one of the major financial beneficiaries of Saudi uranium enrichment likely would be America’s current trade war adversary, Canada.
The White House decision to send the deal to Capitol Hill was a surprise. Earlier, when the Energy Department announcement generated controversy, Trump back-peddled, saying he would not go forward until Saudi Arabia agreed to formally recognize Israel, which the Arab kingdom has always opposed. Trump appeared to have concocted that codicil on the spot.
The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Trump “hasn’t dropped his last minute condition that the kingdom normalize relations with Israel, an administration official said.” Whether it is contained in the package sent to Congress has not been revealed. The WSJ quoted an unnamed administration official, “The President’s position has not changed that the agreement will only move forward if Saudi Arabia joins the Abraham Accords.”
Also on Monday, five former nuclear nonproliferation officials from previous Republican and Democratic administrations called on the Department of Energy to release the text and hitherto hidden details including side agreements that may give the desert kingdom a path to uranium enrichment and a nuclear weapons program.
In a letter to Energy Secretary Chris Wright, the five write, “We, the undersigned former nonproliferation and security officials, are writing to request that the text and side letters of the U.S.-Saudi nuclear cooperative agreement be made available to the public just as every other previous U.S. nuclear cooperative agreement has. There are news reports that these critical documents are being kept from the public and that the side letters may have been submitted to Congress as classified information because of their ‘sensitivity.’ If true, it is unprecedented and makes no sense.”
The five signatories are: Eric Edelman, former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, George W. Bush Administration; Robert Einhorn, former Assistant Secretary of State for Nonproliferation, William Clinton Administration; Robert G. Joseph, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, George W. Bush Administration; Gary Samore, White House Coordinator for Arms Control and Weapons of Mass Destruction, Barack Obama Administration; Henry Sokolski, Defense Department Deputy for Nonproliferation, George H.W. Bush Administration.
The letter says, “The whole point of sharing the text and side agreements of any U.S. civilian nuclear cooperative agreement with Congress is so it can review the merits of the agreement and secure the opinions not just of the government officials that negotiated them, but of outside experts whose job security does not depend on their support of what their Executive Branch employer has negotiated. Keeping these documents from the public also raises a fundamental question: If the agreement and supporting side letters were negotiated to promote a peaceful, safe, nuclear exchange, what is it that the Energy Department or the administration has to hide?”
Trump’s push to cut a nuclear cooperation deal with Saudi Arabia has produced pushback from South Korea, a close U.S. ally for 75 years. South Korea has a large and successful civilian nuclear power program but has wanted the ability to enrich uranium, which the U.S. has consistently barred, even as its hostile neighbor North Korea has an aggressive and mature nuclear weapons program, coupled with long-range missile delivery capability.
The New York Times noted shortly after Trump announced the Saudi deal in July that Trump “has exempted Saudi Arabia from intrusive inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which South Korea has long submitted to to assure the international community that no technology is diverted to weapons projects.”
The Quad Report, covering energy policy and politics