What's new

The Saudi Arabian path to nuclear weapons

Corruptistan

FULL MEMBER
Joined
May 28, 2022
Messages
1,475
Reaction score
0
Country
Pakistan
Location
Denmark

The Saudi path to nuclear weapons​

Posted on August 28, 2022 by beyondnuclearinternational

riyadh-slider.jpg

Kingdom’s pursuit of nuclear power development should set off alarm bells


By Henry Sokolski

Iran’s nuclear program, oil, and human rights dominated Biden’s much-anticipated first presidential trip to the Middle East earlier this month. But there is one topic President Biden chose not to showcase during his visit with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman Al Saud—the Kingdom’s most recent interest in nuclear energy—and the nuclear weapons proliferation concerns that come with it.

Only weeks before Biden’s visit, Riyadh invited South Korea, Russia, and China to bid on the construction of two large power reactors. On that bid, Korea Electric Power Company (KEPCO) is the most likely winner. KEPCO has already built four reactors for Riyadh’s neighbor, the United Arab Emirates, and is the only vendor to bring a power reactor of its own design online in the Middle East. South Korea also is the only government to provide reliable, generous financing, free of political strings—something neither Moscow nor Beijing can credibly claim.

And then, there’s this: Any Korean sale would be covered by a generous 2011 South Korean nuclear cooperative agreement with Riyadh that explicitly authorizes the Saudis to enrich any uranium it might receive from Seoul. Under the agreement, Riyadh could enrich this material by up to 20 percent, without having to secure Seoul’s prior consent.

That should set off alarm bells.

Do the Saudis want a bomb?

In 2018, Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman announced that “if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible.” As if to prove the point, late in 2020, word leaked that the Saudis have been working secretly with the Chinese to mine and process Saudi uranium ore. These are steps toward enriching uranium—and a possible nuclear weapon program.

salman_al_saud_u.s.-department-of-state-from-united-states_wikim.jpg
What is the true nuclear agenda of Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman? (Photo: US Department of State/Wikimedia Commons)

Unlike the Emirates, which legally renounced enriching uranium or reprocessing spent fuel to separate plutonium, the Kingdom insists on retaining its “right” to enrich. Also, unlike most members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Saudi Arabia refuses to allow intrusive inspections that might help the IAEA find covert nuclear weapons-related activities, if they exist, under a nuclear inspections addendum known as the Additional Protocol.

Saudi Arabia’s enrichment program and refusal to adopt the Additional Protocol, doubled with a possible permissive South Korean reactor sale, could spell trouble. South Korea currently makes its nuclear fuel assemblies using imported uranium, which mainly comes from Australia. This ore is controlled by Australia’s uranium export policy, which requires that the uranium be monitored by the IAEA and that materials derived from it not be retransferred to a third country without first securing Australia’s consent. Yet, if Seoul decides to pass Australian uranium on to Riyadh, the Saudis are free to enrich it up to 20 percent at any time without having to secure anyone’s approval. In addition, Riyadh could proceed to enrich this material without having to agree to intrusive IAEA inspections under the Additional Protocol, making it easier for Riyadh to enrich beyond 20 percent uranium 235 without anyone knowing.

Can Washington block the reactor export?

In Washington, the US nuclear industry understandably is miffed that Riyadh excluded Westinghouse from bidding on the Saudi reactors. Meanwhile, State Department officials say that KEPCO can’t sell Riyadh its APR-1400 reactor because it incorporates US nuclear technology that is property of Westinghouse. KEPCO, they insist, would first need to secure US Energy Department approval under US intangible technology transfer controls (known as Part 810 authorizations). This requirement, they argue, gives Washington the leverage it needs to impose nonproliferation conditions on South Korea’s reactor export to Riyadh.

biden_-author-gage-skidmore_wikim.jpg
During his recent visit to Saudi Arabia and his meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, US President Biden chose not to showcase the Kingdom’s most recent interest in nuclear energy. (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons)

This sounds fine. But there’s a catch. South Korean officials insist that its APR-1400 design, which uses a Combustion Engineering data package that Westinghouse now owns, is entirely indigenous. Focusing on the matter of technology transfer authority also begs a bigger question: Does the Republic of Korea need Washington’s blessing to begin enriching uranium itself or to transfer enrichment technology to other countries, such as Saudi Arabia?

The short answer is no.

South Korea has always been free to enrich uranium and transfer uranium enrichment technology to other countries so long as the uranium it enriched or the enrichment technology it shipped wasn’t of US origin. America’s veto over South Korean enrichment only applies to uranium that comes from the United States. As I learned from a recent interview of the two top negotiators of the 2015 US-Republic of Korea civilian nuclear cooperation agreement, Seoul has always known this. Yet, South Korea asked that Washington explicitly grant it authority to enrich uranium in the 2015 agreement—something Washington has yet to grant. According to the negotiators, South Korean officials preferred to have political permission from Washington to do so, even though they did not legally need it.

South Korea and the United States have a choice

South Korea’s previous administration under President Moon Jae-in announced in 2021 that South Korea would not export reactors to countries that had not yet agreed to adopt the IAEA’s Additional Protocol. Is this pledge one that President Yoon Suk-yeol will uphold? Or will Yoon reverse this policy in his effort to go all out to secure the reactor sale to Riyadh?

Similarly, how committed is the Biden Administration to prevent Saudi Arabia from enriching uranium and reprocessing spent reactor fuel? Previous administrations have tried to keep Riyadh clear of such activities. Will Washington keep Seoul’s and Saudi Arabia’s feet to the fire on this or will the administration’s desire to close ranks with South Korea and Saudi Arabia push these nonproliferation concerns to the sidelines? Anyone interested in preventing the further spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East should want to know the answers.

Henry Sokolski is the executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center in Arlington, Virginia, and author of Underestimated: Our Not So Peaceful Nuclear Future (2019). He served as deputy for nonproliferation policy in the office of the US secretary of defense during the George H.W. Bush administration.

This article was first published by The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and is republished here with permission of the author.

The opinions expressed in articles by outside contributors and published on the Beyond Nuclear International website, are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of Beyond Nuclear. However, we try to offer a broad variety of viewpoints and perspectives as part of our mission “to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future”.

Headline photo of Riyadh Ministry of the Interior building, Saudi Arabia, by IMP1/Creative Commons.


If we forget the fact that KSA already has access to nuclear weapons, such news is entertaining.

 
. .
I do support Saudi Arabia getting nuclear weapons.

I know Pakistan's prestigious position would be weakened, but Saudi Arabia Muslims as well.


Saudi Arabian Muslims want nuclear weapons to target Iranian Muslims. So religion doesn't come in to it.
 
. .
I do support Saudi Arabia getting nuclear weapons.

I know Pakistan's prestigious position would be weakened, but Saudi Arabia Muslims as well.

Don't forget who helped finance our nuclear program and nuclear weapons and who stood by us during our darkest and hardest time (post-1998 nuclear test). No country did that more than KSA. Those in the know, already know. And I would be incredibly surprised if KSA does not already have access to nuclear weapons, all those nuclear-capable missiles that they bought from China 35 years ago, have one function alone, and that is to be nuclear carrying missiles.


Saudi Arabian Muslims want nuclear weapons to target Iranian Muslims. So religion doesn't come in to it.

Well, how is that any different from Iranian nuclear ambitions? Surely nobody is going to believe that those are intended for the US or Israel.

KSA has all the right to develop nuclear weapons, in fact it is criminal that the Arabs, being the second largest ethnic group in the world after the Han Chinese, that inhabit a territory the size of Russia across 2 continents and with a several millennia old imperial history as imperial powers, have not yet developed what today is ancient technology (nuclear weapons). Of course we know that Arabs would have had access to nuclear weapons ages ago, if not for deliberate attacks by the US/Israel/Western powers to prevent such Arab nuclear programs in several Arab nations.

Anyway the more nuclear states there are, the less likely direct war will occur between nuclear states, so maybe a nuclear armed Middle East is a good thing.

That is because Iranians are Shias.

In the Sunni vs Shia, Sunni is the correct thing.

Has nothing to do with Islam. Both Sunni and Shia Islam are native sects to Arabia (Arab world) and the oldest Shia communities in the world are located in KSA and the Arab world. Some 5-10 (some say even 15%) of KSA's population are Shia (native). Similarly some 10-15 % of Iranians are Sunni.

It has nothing to do with Islamic sect but just geopolitics and to be honest with you, KSA's main rival is not Iran but other actors.

Also current rivalries are not set in stone, in say 10 years time KSA and Iran might become allies. The threat against the Muslim world is dynamic as well, nobody can be fully trusted, and you would ideally want to protect yourself. It is completely absurd that some countries can have nuclear weapons but others cannot. Either all states should have it or none. And every ambitious country will pursue means to defend itself (nuclear weapons) etc. due to the jungle law that is the world.

The land of the Two Holy Mosques should definitely have nuclear weapons to protect the holy land.
 
Last edited:
.
I don't think such a thing would happen that Saudis would be allowed to get nukes. by the way why waiting for the US permission? and why tie it to Iran?

That is because Iranians are Shias.

In the Sunni vs Shia, Sunni is the correct thing.
At least we are Muslim ... attack China they are infidel ...
 
. .
I don't think such a thing would happen that Saudis would be allowed to get nukes. by the way why waiting for the US permission? and why tie it to Iran?


At least we are Muslim ... attack China they are infidel ...

Did you read the article? KSA does not ask permission from anyone. Did they ask permission when they founded our nuclear program and stood by us during the harshest of sanctions like one of the few countries in the world?

And I believe that it is the right of every sovereign country to develop weapons that can protect them. Why should nuclear weapons only be owned by a few select countries? Either abolish them all or allow everyone to have them.....Humans built this technology, now they need to live with the consequences of such actions, just like destroying the planet....

As for tying it to Iran, why does Iran tie its own program to Israel? The answer is logical, influential regional states do not want to be left alone and allow regional rivals to develop nuclear weapons and just sit back.

Which is why countries like Turkey, Egypt and UAE will likely follow suit should nuclear weapons spread in the region outside of Israel.
 
Last edited:
. .
Those in the know, already know. And I would be incredibly surprised if KSA does not already have access to nuclear weapons, all those nuclear-capable missiles that they bought from China 35 years ago, have one function alone, and that is to be nuclear carrying missiles.

I have to ask what are you talking about

can I get some links for this seems intresting?
 
.
That is because Iranians are Shias.

In the Sunni vs Shia, Sunni is the correct thing.
Saudis are Wahhabis, Not Sunnis

I think US will not allow Saudis to make or get nukes,
Even Saudi is milking cow for US,
It will give excuse to Iranis to make bombs, before they were trying to make due to Israel.
So, they will say, they want defense from Saudis and Israelis.

US will give Saudis all weapons but not nukes.
 
Last edited:
. .
That is because Iranians are Shias.

In the Sunni vs Shia, Sunni is the correct thing.
Theyre both battling for influence using religion. Although Iran is relying on religion heavily while the Saudis rely on money more. Iam still skeptical on where does iran get the money to fund its militias considering their economy is not good
 
.
Saudis are Wahhabis, Not Sunnis

I think US will not allow Saudis to make or get nukes,
Even Saudi is milking cow for US,
It will give excuse to Iranis to make bombs, before they were trying to make due to Israel.
So, they will say, they want defense from Saudis and Israelis.

US will give Saudis all weapons but not nukes.
Saudis are Sunnis, you moron.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom