US Will Give Saudi Arabia Nuclear Technology In Deal Pushed By Top Trump Advisors

[Hassan Guy]

http://www.thelibertyconservative.c...ar-technology-deal-pushed-top-trump-advisors/

Several Trump administration officials are pushing a diplomatic deal that would give Saudi Arabia nuclear technology for civilian purposes, according to Mike Cernovich, the independent journalist who broke the stories about Susan Rice spying on Trump officials and H.R. McMaster wanting a massive ground war in Syria.

National Security Advisors H.R. McMaster and Dina Powell, along with Chief Economic Advisor Gary Cohn, are all pressuring President Donald Trump to accept the deal in preparation for a ground war in Syria, according to some sources close to Cernovich. Trump, however, is reluctant to go through with the deal.

Despite being one of the world’s largest oil producers, Saudi Arabia intends to build 16 nuclear power plants by 2030.

Whether Saudi Arabia’s nuclear technology will be used solely for civilian purposes remains to be seen.

In 2011, former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki al-Faisal stated that his country would consider producing nuclear weapons if it found itself wedged between a nuclear-armed Israel and Iran.

Saudi Arabia obtaining advanced weaponry remains a source of concern for some U.S. officials.

“Saudi Arabia is an unreliable ally with a poor human rights record,” Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) told Foreign Policy in 2016. “We should not rush to sell them advanced arms and promote an arms race in the Middle East,” Sen. Paul added, referring to an arms deal that later failed.

Regarding a nuclear-armed Saudi Arabia, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) told CNN in a 2016 interview that “Saudi has good relationships with Pakistan, they could just buy a weapon and again further destabilize the Middle East.”

However, concerns about Saudi Arabia’s nuclear program will likely fall on deaf ears in Washington D.C. due to the Saudi’s enormous influence over U.S. politics and media.

Saudi Arabia spends over $10 million per year on lobbying and public relations in the United States. They use contacts in American media to influence public opinion, such as New York Times Bureau Chief Steven Lee Myers, Wall Street Journal chief foreign affairs correspondent Jay Solomon, the Washington Post’s Joby Warrick, and Reuters columnist Paul Eckert.

The Saudis have also proven their ability to wield significant influence over U.S. policy in other ways, as shown by their successful 2016 threat to sell $750 billion in treasury securities over proposed legislation that would have allowed families of 9/11 victims to sue the Saudi government.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

This is strange/senseless news as KSA has already signed nuclear energy cooperation deals (officially) with countries such as South Korea, China, France, Kazakhstan, Japan to name a few.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-o-s/saudi-arabia.aspx

Even with Russia.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-saudi-russia-nuclear-idUKKBN0OZ10R20150619

That is officially as I have no doubt that we have cooperated closely with Pakistan on this front.

KSA plans to built 16 nuclear power plants before 2030.

So the Americans are quite late. They should have proposed this technology to KSA ages ago. Now in next door UAE a nuclear power plant (Barakah - 4 nuclear reactors are built at the same time - unprecedented) is almost finished.

South Korea is involved.

http://gulfnews.com/news/uae/government/nuclear-plant-to-power-one-quarter-of-uae-by-2020-1.2008531

 

[jamal18]

This is strange/senseless news as KSA has already signed nuclear energy cooperation deals (officially) with countries such as South Korea, China, France, Kazakhstan, Japan to name a few.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-o-s/saudi-arabia.aspx

Even with Russia.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-saudi-russia-nuclear-idUKKBN0OZ10R20150619

That is officially as I have no doubt that we have cooperated closely with Pakistan on this front.

KSA plans to built 16 nuclear power plants before 2030.

So the Americans are quite late. They should have proposed this technology to KSA ages ago. Now in next door UAE a nuclear power plant (Barakah - 4 nuclear reactors are built at the same time - unprecedented) is almost finished.

South Korea is involved.

http://gulfnews.com/news/uae/government/nuclear-plant-to-power-one-quarter-of-uae-by-2020-1.2008531

Exactly. Almost non-news. Saudi Arabia is free to buy nuclear technology from a bunch of countries. It's a loss to the Americans.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Exactly. Almost non-news. Saudi Arabia is free to buy nuclear technology from a bunch of countries. It's a loss to the Americans.

However it needs to be told that quite a few Saudi Arabians have studied nuclear engineering in the US and that the Americans have helped establish King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy and other learning facilities where nuclear engineering is taught.

This is an interesting report from late March this year written by Americans but not everything is accurate/should be taken seriously.

http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/SaudiArabiaProliferationRisks_30Mar2017_Final.pdf

Anyway as you say it is their loss and if they really wanted to help KSA in this regard, they could have done it ages ago. Before KSA even had supported/helped fund (strongly rumored to at least) the nuclear programs of Pakistan and Iraq (before the letters nuclear program was ended by outside forces).

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Trumpet is late again.

Saudi has plenty of options to choose from.

 

[cloud4000]

Exactly. Almost non-news. Saudi Arabia is free to buy nuclear technology from a bunch of countries. It's a loss to the Americans.

True. But it hasn't done so. US is still in the mix. And given the bonhomie between Trump and Saudi Arabia, US has a chance.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

True. But it hasn't done so. US is still in the mix. And given the bonhomie between Trump and Saudi Arabia, US has a chance.

Trump has nothing to do with KSA-US relations which have dimensions that far predate his tenure and which will outlive his tenure too.

In any case Obama actually did KSA a favor as we were too aligned/dependent on the US pre-2008. Nowadays we have established or reestablished ties with ancient partners and new rising partners. The US is aware of this and does not want to "lose" KSA/GCC. This will work in our favor as it has already done in terms of certain military exports that Obama had banned/prevented. At the same time our relationship with China is excellent and growing quickly (our largest economic partner) while relations with Russia are also steadily growing. As are ties with other emerging partners aside from the traditional Arab/Muslim partners in the Arab and Muslim world.

KSA/GCC does not take sides but looks for its own interests first and foremost like all other countries. This ignorant notion of KSA being firmly and solidly planted in the American camp on all fronts is bogus. KSA has many differences with the US in the region alone let alone elsewhere. However that is the case with almost all allies/partners so no surprises there.

 

[The SC]

The UAE experiment of building 4 nuclear reactors 1400 MW each in a record time of 8 years, will most likely be repeated in KSA, since the latter needs 16 nuclear reactors by 2030..Korea will build 4, China 4 in a first phase and Russia might build 4 and Japan another 4 in a second phase.. so 8 at a time, the second phase should start at the middle time of phase 1.. the only concern is the variety of the technologies, but then all of them can be operated by Engineers of the building nations till Saudi Engineers are trained enough on each technology to handle the tasks on their own by around 2040..
South Korea is the best prospect for 8 nuclear reactors (since the whole UAE project management is at hand), Russia has the latest generation reactors that they will be building in Egypt, but they might be slow, China has good nuclear tech and can do it fast, Japan has very good tech but I am not sure if they will participate or called upon..

 

[cloud4000]

Trump has nothing to do with KSA-US relations which have dimensions that far predate his tenure and which will outlive his tenure too.

In any case Obama actually did KSA a favor as we were too aligned/dependent on the US pre-2008. Nowadays we have established or reestablished ties with ancient partners and new rising partners. The US is aware of this and does not want to "lose" KSA/GCC. This will work in our favor as it has already done in terms of certain military exports that Obama had banned/prevented. At the same time our relationship with China is excellent and growing quickly (our largest economic partner) while relations with Russia are also steadily growing. As are ties with other emerging partners aside from the traditional Arab/Muslim partners in the Arab and Muslim world.

KSA/GCC does not take sides but looks for its own interests first and foremost like all other countries. This ignorant notion of KSA being firmly and solidly planted in the American camp on all fronts is bogus. KSA has many differences with the US in the region alone let alone elsewhere. However that is the case with almost all allies/partners so no surprises there.

Your long-winded response basically repeats the same thing: Saudi Arabia has many option when it comes to acquiring nuclear technology. All I'm saying is that US has a chance -- not a guarantee -- to get some of Saudi Arabia's business.

 

[The SC]

Your long-winded response basically repeats the same thing: Saudi Arabia has many option when it comes to acquiring nuclear technology. All I'm saying is that US has a chance -- not a guarantee -- to get some of Saudi Arabia's business.

The US does not build nuclear reactors abroad, and nuclear tech will be acquired from the US if need be, but most likely from other project partners like China, Russia or Japan and South Korea.. KSA needs power plants first and foremost..

 

[Zibago]

Trump has nothing to do with KSA-US relations which have dimensions that far predate his tenure and which will outlive his tenure too.

In any case Obama actually did KSA a favor as we were too aligned/dependent on the US pre-2008. Nowadays we have established or reestablished ties with ancient partners and new rising partners. The US is aware of this and does not want to "lose" KSA/GCC. This will work in our favor as it has already done in terms of certain military exports that Obama had banned/prevented. At the same time our relationship with China is excellent and growing quickly (our largest economic partner) while relations with Russia are also steadily growing. As are ties with other emerging partners aside from the traditional Arab/Muslim partners in the Arab and Muslim world.

KSA/GCC does not take sides but looks for its own interests first and foremost like all other countries. This ignorant notion of KSA being firmly and solidly planted in the American camp on all fronts is bogus. KSA has many differences with the US in the region alone let alone elsewhere. However that is the case with almost all allies/partners so no surprises there.

Trump is accelerating downfall of the empire status of US its allies are slowly moving away its diplomatic power is declining slowly

 

[Bubblegum Crisis]

The US does not build nuclear reactors abroad, and nuclear tech will be acquired from the US if need be, but most likely from other project partners like China, Russia or Japan and South Korea.. KSA needs power plants first and foremost..

You forget France (Areva). No doubt, the best in the world (Technology, expertise and security).

No, the only true question is : Who will agree to supply the uranium enrichment plant ? Japan: No; South Korea: No; China: Yes; Russia: Yes, France: Maybe...

Trumpet is late again.

Saudi has plenty of options to choose from.

The right information : USA is late again in nuclear technology with KSA.

Reason : Israel.



...

 

[Saif al-Arab]

You forget France (Areva). No doubt, the best in the world (Technology, expertise and security).

No, the only true question is : Who will agree to supply the uranium enrichment plant ? Japan: No; South Korea: No; China: Yes; Russia: Yes, France: Maybe...






The right information : USA is late again in nuclear technology with KSA.

Reason : Israel.



...

The million dollar question here is why has there not been a joint Arab nuclear energy policy? How come is it possible that Arab states like Libya and Iraq were on their way to become nuclear armed state ages ago (3 decades ago) but today, 3 decades later, there is no joint or even a regional policy in this regard?

We have the numbers (500 million), the money, the human capital, the materials necessary (uranium in particular) etc.

What is lacking, as usual, is political will.

At least the GCC should have pursued a unified nuclear energy/renewable energy policy AGES ago.

What is the Arab Atomic Energy Agency (AAEA) doing exactly nowadays?

 

[Bubblegum Crisis]

...

We have the numbers (500 million), the money, the human capital, the materials necessary (uranium in particular) etc.

What is lacking, as usual, is political will.

At least the GCC should have pursued a unified nuclear energy policy/renewable energy AGES ago.

...

I think that with all the interconnections that take place in the GCC (Defense, education, research, rail transport, road etc ...) this will gradually be put in place to rationalize needs and make significant savings.

But this requires very heavy investments to connect and manage a cross-border energy package with several countries.

But do not be too hard. Even the European Union has not yet managed to set up a common energy policy. The climate protocol signed in Paris in 2016 will most certainly accelerate things, even at home - GCC -.


...

 

[Saif al-Arab]

I think that with all the interconnections that take place in the GCC (Defense, education, research, rail transport, road etc ...) this will gradually be put in place to rationalize needs and make significant savings.

But this requires very heavy investments to connect and manage a cross-border energy package with several countries.

But do not be too hard. Even the European Union has not yet managed to set up a common energy policy. The climate protocol signed in Paris in 2016 will most certainly accelerate things, even at home - GCC -.


...

Yes, this will become a inevitable development however this development could have occurred much earlier had the leaders taken the adequate initiative.

I am basically saying that such a policy should have been kickstarted much earlier.

I would not compare the EU with the GCC as the EU is a much bigger entity, much more complex and made up by dozens upon dozens of very different countries, peoples who have very different cultures and who speak totally different languages and countries with very different policies and goals etc.

GCC is many times more alike on all fronts. I would not compare those two with each other in this regard.

I think there is reason to be critical as our effort (so far) is nowhere near our potential or abilities.

If we were talking about Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Nepal, Kyrgyzstan, Albania, Bosnia, Suriname , Brunei or similar countries my criticism would have made no sense but we are not.

It should not be a big problem to coordinate the nuclear energy policy within the GCC and harmonize it. In any case the projects kickstarted in this regard and the planned ones are already working with similar/the same partners which proves my point further.

Let us not talk about the Arab Atomic Energy Agency (AAEA). What are they doing (concrete steps) lately other than holding meetings? Not much information. Why are so many of our people (nuclear scientists etc.) working abroad for foreign countries when they should (ideally) be serving their own countries? This is a general problem.