By Kennedy Maize
One word succinctly describes Donald Trump’s possible give-away nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia: incoherence. 
The U.S. Department of Energy announced the long-anticipated agreement between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia on July 22 with almost no details, just claims of its importance. Energy Secretary Chris Wright bragged, “These agreements reflect our two nations’ shared commitment to strengthening U.S.-Saudi commercial relations, delivering prosperity at home and security to our allies abroad.”
“Rest assured,” Wright continued, “these agreements uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and nonproliferation, while relying on the world’s best nuclear technology and scientists, designed right here in the United States. Thanks to President Trump, the American nuclear renaissance is underway and will deliver long-term benefits to the American and Saudi people.”
As of the writing of this post, the U.S. has not released the text of the agreement. It requires Congressional review and approval, on a 90-day fast track, but has not yet been submitted for review.
Both regional and U.S. publications soon began looking at the details as best they could find them, discovering reasons to believe the “123 Agreement” under the terms of the 1954 Atomic Energy Act could be problematic for the Trump administration.
The United Arab Emirates’ English language newspaper Gulf News reported the day after the announcement, “Unlike some previous U.S. nuclear cooperation agreements, however, the Saudi deal does not require Riyadh to adopt the so-called ‘gold standard’ of nonproliferation, under which countries permanently renounce uranium enrichment and spent-fuel reprocessing.
“Instead, officials said Saudi Arabia could eventually enrich uranium for fuel used in civilian nuclear reactors under agreed safeguards—a provision that has raised concerns among arms-control advocates because enrichment technology can, in theory, be used to produce material suitable for nuclear weapons if diverted from peaceful purposes.”
The New York Times the same day reported that the deal “could enable Saudi Arabia to enrich its own fuel for nuclear reactors. It took many by surprise in Israel, which has a secretive nuclear weapons program, as well as a publicly acknowledged nuclear research reactor.”
The Wall Street Journal editorial board the afternoon of the DOE announcement wrote, “Why does Saudi Arabia need to enrich uranium on its home soil? The answer isn’t complicated: It doesn’t unless it would like to establish the rudiments of a nuclear-weapons program as a contingency. The more difficult question to answer is why the Trump Administration is going along with it.”
The next day, the Council on Foreign Relations said, “An official text of the agreement has not been released yet, but if the leaked portions faithfully reflect the deal, the United States has agreed to help develop Saudi Arabia’s nuclear program over thirty years. This includes a uranium enrichment facility that American companies would operate.”
According to several reports, the deal with the Saudis for enrichment includes an exemption to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, reflecting Trump’s antipathy toward international organizations. Instead, U.S. inspectors would enforce the deal, unlike the Obama administration’s 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, which Trump dumped in his first term.
Apparently spooked by the pushback, Trump on Truth Social July 23 announced that the Saudi 123 Agreement “is totally subject to Saudi Arabia joining the very respected and successful Abraham Accords.” The NYT commented that Trump’s surprise announcement “put the agreement’s immediate future in doubt. The Saudi government has made clear it has no intention of recognizing Israel without creating a pathway toward the creation of a Palestinian state.”
Writing in the Wall Street Journal on July 26, Georgetown University Professor Matthew Kroenig and Henry Sokolski of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (a frequent contributor to The Quad Report), focused criticism on the uranium enrichment provisions.
They noted that “for the past half-century Washington has never included nuclear fuel-making as a part of any of its civilian nuclear agreements with states that lack nuclear weapons. In recent decades, other major nuclear supplier states including France, Russia, China, Japan and South Korea have followed America’s example.
Washington should continue this policy.”
“There is no enrichment”
That same day, Trump’s United Nations Ambassador Mike Waltz on NBC’s “Meet the Press” said, “There is no enrichment envisioned in this plan.” He then appeared on Fox News, where he doubled down: “These are civilian nuclear power plants, as the Saudis look to diversify. But the difference is, they’ve signed up for full inspections. There is no enrichment.”
Former Florida Republican Congressman Waltz was Trump’s choice for national security advisor after the November 2024 election, tendering his resignation from Congress as Trump was sworn into office. The White House defenestrated him on May 1, 2025, exiling him to the UN, far lower in Trump’s hierarchy.
Waltz’s demotion came after it was revealed that he inadvertently added Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal group chat privately discussing coming U.S. strikes in Yemen targeting the Houthi militia.
The swirl of events over Trump’s Saudi twists and turns could hurt the prospects for Congressional approval. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a folksy but sharp-minded legislator, told CBS’s Face the Nation that he has doubts. “We’re bombing a country to keep them from getting a nuclear weapon, but we’re signing a deal with another country,” he said. “I know it’s a commercial agreement, but that the world perceives, as possibly, someday, leading to a nuclear weapon.”
Even Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems confused by Trump’s on-again, off-again 123 deal. Appearing on the Fox News Sunday Morning Futures show, Netanyahu praised conditioning the Saudi deal for a “civilian” nuclear power program on Riyadh formally recognizing Israel.
Then Netanyahu wavered. “I stress civilian because the last thing we want, and I’m sure the last thing the president wants, is a military program, a nuclear program, in Saudi Arabia.”
The Quad Report, covering energy policy and politics
