Skip to content
Bramble

Politics

Two Democratic senators file resolution to block US-Saudi nuclear cooperation deal

Senators Jeff Merkley and Edward Markey introduced a joint resolution of disapproval against the Trump administration's civilian nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia, arguing it lacks nonproliferation safeguards. A Senate vote is possible after Nov. 29.

2 outlets · 0L · 2C · 0R First reported Account updated
Image: Anadolu Agency
Image: Gulf News

1 / 2

The story, neutrally told

Centre · 2Democratic Senators Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Edward Markey of Massachusetts introduced a joint resolution of disapproval on Thursday seeking to block the Trump administration's proposed civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia. Centre · 2The measure sets up a potential Senate vote after Nov. 29, before the agreement takes effect. Centre · 2The deal is known as a "123 agreement", after Section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954; under the review process the agreement enters into force after a 90-day congressional review period unless Congress passes a joint resolution of disapproval.

Centre · 1Anadolu Agency reports that President Donald Trump submitted the agreement to Congress in August and that lawmakers have 90 session days to consider it; it also describes the review period as 90 days, and the two reports do not reconcile the terms. Centre · 1Merkley, a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that giving Saudi Arabia access to US civilian nuclear technology "without ironclad protections" against it providing a foundation for a nuclear bomb is "unacceptable". He called for Saudi restrictions on uranium enrichment and spent-fuel reprocessing and stronger international inspections. Centre · 2Markey said the deal "is about megatons, not megawatts" and does not meet the nonproliferation "gold standard"; he called it "the starting gun for a Middle East nuclear arms race" and said Congress must reject it.

Centre · 1According to Gulf News (carrying IANS copy), the senators say the deal fails two safeguards: the "gold standard", under which a recipient commits not to enrich uranium or reprocess spent fuel, and adherence to the IAEA's Additional Protocol, which gives inspectors broader access. Centre · 1The senators warn that the absence of these conditions could prompt other regional powers to seek similar terms, and that Iran could resist future restrictions on its own programme if Saudi Arabia were allowed capabilities denied to Tehran. Centre · 1Under the 30-year deal, US companies would play a central role in developing Saudi nuclear infrastructure, and the agreement could potentially allow Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium on its own territory, which has drawn concern from lawmakers and nonproliferation advocates.

Centre · 1Introducing the resolution does not suspend the agreement or show that Congress has rejected it. It follows earlier lawmaker demands for transparency, including access to two side letters the administration has classified.

Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on. The pill in front of each says where its sources sit: Left, Centre or Right when one side supplies at least half of them, Mixed when they are evenly split. The number is how many outlets it cites.

Left0 outlets

No left outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Centre2 outlets

Framing
Both outlets report the resolution as a congressional challenge to the administration's deal, led by the two senators' statements and the legal review process. Gulf News's copy is from IANS.
Emphasis
Anadolu stresses the review process and deal terms (30 years, US firms, possible Saudi enrichment); Gulf News stresses the senators' two safeguard demands and regional arms-race and Iran concerns.
Leaves out or plays down
Neither carries a response from the White House or Saudi Arabia; Gulf News's links mention Trump tying the pact to Israel normalisation, but the text gives no administration defence of the deal.
Charged language
“starting gun for a Middle East nuclear arms race”“megatons, not megawatts”
For example
“The US-Saudi nuclear deal is about megatons, not megawatts” — Anadolu Agency
“The move marks a new congressional challenge to the administration's nuclear diplomacy with Riyadh.” — Gulf News

Right0 outlets

No right outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Ask about this story

Loading…