Of course they can be trusted. Just like Obama trusted the Iranians.
1
The U.S./Saudi Deal is among the smaller arms deals that Saudi Arabia has made with Western World leaders. The Saudis are amassing an indefatigable arsenal and aiming it at world domination. Only Germany — Germany — has withdrawn from their deal to supply arms to the Saudi Realm. We are the purveyors of our own doom.
5
Are people seriously this insane? What if the 15 Saudi hijackers on 9/11 were equipped with nuclear weapons?
Saudi Arabia is a dangerous theocracy fueled by religious extremism and a medieval mindset.
12
If Saudi Arabia develops the capacity to build nuclear bombs, they will not hesitate to use them against Iran. The Saudis are not known for compassion,
as evidenced by their years' long decimation of Yemen, which began long before the Houthis started firing missiles toward Saudi Arabia.
Israel also detests Iran, and are aliies with the Saudis against Iran. They would not hesitate to join with Arabia in a bloodbath against Iran. They are also not a gentle people, whose troopd gun down Palistinian rock throwers and who continue to steal Palistinian territory,
Enter the U.S., the 3rd ally of this trio. They are willing to sell not only weapons, but nuclear technology to a country set on more war and decimation in the Middle East, and that will not permit inspections of their "nuclear enrichment program".
The wars in the Middle East have lasted too long, and America has killed too many there, especially as collateral damage. It's time we supported peace in the Middle East, not enable the bloodlust of the Saudis and Israel.
The Iran accord is still firmly in place and has the commitment of all other signatories to it--the E.U., China, Russia, and the U.K., reaffirmed this summer. Only the U.S. reneged.
Although the E.U. has deadly nuclear capability, it is more logical to support Iran's economy and de-escalate tensions in the Middle East.
Remember, we live here. The U.S. is an ocean away. All that nuclear fallout will affect us, and the Middle East, first.
6
This is a surpassingly dangerous idea for us and everyone in the region. If the Saudis build one or more reactors, after the Crown Prince has laid down this marker about quickly developing a Saudi bomb, then the odds are very high that Israel will do its utmost to destroy such reactors. The Israeli air force reduced Saddam Hussein's Osirak reactor to rubble and the Crown Prince should expect the same. For Israel, a Saudi reactor capable of producing enriched fissile fuel of weapons grade is a clear causus bellum.
2
The U.S./Saudi Deal is among the smaller arms deals that Saudi Arabia has made with the Western World. They are amassing an indefatigable arsenal and aiming it at world domination. Only Germany — Germany — has withdrawn from their deal to supply arms to the Saudi Realm. We are the purveyors of our own doom.
2
Seriously? This is even on the table? The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has absolutely no right to have atomic power given its stance in the region and the world. Not only were 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th Saudis, but their antagonistic stance in the region and the world should be cause enough to stop any effort to obtain nuclear capability. This is not a stable regime, as evidenced by the Khasoghi murder and their ongoing war in Yemen. They are simply too dangerous to the world.
3
I see this has already been bumped off the on-line front page for U.S.Climate Report Warns of Damaged Environment and Shrinking Economy, so let's just do this. Give Saudi Arabia the nukes, give them whatever they want. Give the Proud Boys nukes, too, while we're at it. Let's just be done with it. I'm tired of worrying about all this stuff.
We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when...
(By the way, wasn't Rick Perry the fellow who didn't realize the Energy Department included nuclear energy? Did anybody get a copy of the departmental organizational outline to him yet? Can somebody take care of that? And maybe a facilities map?)
6
9/11.
Yemen.
5
With the House of Saud and the House of Trump working together, the future could turn out to be a terrifying place. In the past Trump has said if you have nukes "Why not use them" We can hope our country wakes up and votes Trump out of office. Hopefully the damage done will not be too great to overcome. I am definitely afraid.
4
How is this even a serious question?
4
Saudi Arabia could buy bombs from Pakistan. It would be way easier than building them.
1
Saudi Arabia has a leader who had a journalist murdered, which he denies. Why would anyone give them the ability to create their own weapons grade material from Ann untrustworthy murderer?
2
Saudi Arabia is a murderous totalitarian dictatorship that has invaded two of its neighbors in the last decade, kidnapped a foreign leader, has threatened another neighbor with invasion because of unfavorable news coverage and shares no values with America. It is time for the US to stop selling them weapons or technology and stop letting them spend their money undermining American democratic institutions. Vladimir Putin would make a better friend than the Saudi regime.
3
Honestly speaking,the only nation in the world used its nuke power so far is America under Mr.Truman in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Why don't the USA of 2018 take a lead to wipe out the nuke stock pile of the world by chalk out a plan
and implement through UN?. To take a lead, the members
of UN security council have to come forward by initiating a candid and transparent inspection of their " wipe out nuke stock pile" program to the world leaders with IAEA. Failing which, every member of NSG may tend to sell their nuclear equipment by justifying the shadow of its doubt about the other member of the group. Saying,"If I am not ready to give the nuclear facilities to a nation,it may knock the other member's door" is nothing but a justification for a lucrative business deal. We need nuclear power plants and not nukes. For the past fifty years we are unable find drugs for 'sleeping sickness, many sorts of tumor and many other ailments. Why don't we divert our investment on the welfare of the human being that we waste on nukes?.
Saudi Arabia is not an ally. It is a rogue state & must treated as such.
5
Does the $80 billion go into the federal treasury or into the big corporations who got the big tax cuts who build the technology? Will it reduce the deficit? Or does it go into trump’s accounts to build a Saudi resort/golf course?
6
Can they be trusted? Absolutely NOT, no more than we can tell Big Don to tell the truth, ever.
5
It's never about trust. A self-serving, entitled, cruel, egotistical madman who does not care about human rights or greater humanity can become leader of any country: democratic, autocratic theocratic etc.
Saudi Arabia is no more or less trustworthy than any other country and the US is no more or less trustworthy than the Saudi's other touted avenues of nuclear power plant building: China or Russia. An international endeavor under the aegis of the IAEA would be the best of all the bad options—nuclear disarmament would be the sanest and wisest.
Everyone turned a blind eye when Israel built its bombs, why does anyone think it won't be the same for Saudi Arabia. The Neo-Cons Faustian pact is to add it to their vanguard for obliterating Iran and skewing the balance of power to their advantage—they hope. It's beyond me why, the countless times the West has meddled in the ME it has always created a dangerous, destructive see-saw, but it has made a few more billionaires.
And if that were not bad enough, now there is a new problem to add to the dangerous mix. If the CIA or whatever intelligence service says Saudi Arabia is building a bomb, belief and action will depend on who is in power and the size of the kickback on the table, "maybe it is, maybe it isn't". It is not about trust or fact, it is about transaction, self-serving-short-term gratification i.e. who has access to the button.
4
As a recent, former university teacher in Saudi Arabia for a number of years, a common saying among my colleagues and I was "they lie as easily as they breathe" - and with great passion, to boot. Also, make no mistake, it's a place where "blood is thicker than water", and as Westerners, we're low on the totem pole of respect/backing - no matter what you believe your relationship is. In other words, No, they can not be trusted - in situations where/when it suits them to lie (in fact, I don't even think they think of it as "lying"). For example, when faced with international outrage over a gruesome murder or when there's no limit to your ego and quest for control/power. Btw - I actually enjoyed my time in Saudi and love my Saudi friends, colleagues and students, but... this was my observation/experience.
6
Is Americal losing its national marbles? We are tinkering with the idea of match-making the demonstrated insanity within our own White House with that of the Saudi Royal Palace to create the ultimate nightmare of yet another manifestly untrustworthy potential nuclear power in the highly unstable Middle East.
The same Saudi authorities, who multiple times over the past six weeks have migrated from blanket denials to conflicting versions of their role in the grisly murder of what their crown prince recently described to his US counterpart and Admirer-in-Chief (the author of what a great man Kim Jong Un is and how trustworthy Vladimir Putin is) as an "enemy of the state", now seek to reassure us of their peaceful intentions. Whom should the American people trust more, Donald Trump or his newly acquired co-conspirator, Mohammed bin Salman?
The obvious answer is that neither one is worthy of our trust. Nor has either one exhibited the necessary stability and judgment to be entrusted with decision-making power over any means by which weapons of mass destruction might be acquired. No rationalization, given the Saudis' present hosilities toward their own dissenters, Yemen, and friendships of convenience with a Netanyahu-dominated Israel, and regardless of our past mutual history, can legitimize continuation of our current relations with Saudi Arabia while DJT and MBS remain in office.
Just as we cannot condone Iran's behavior, neither can we condone the behavior of Saudi Arabia.
2
This is a terrible idea on its own much less on top of the bad corrupt arms deal that should be cancelled.
Trump family business. For sale. 911 perpetrators - ok, Nazis in Charlottesville ok, elected official hitting reporters - ok, deny climate change -ok, say to top military “why do you need a strategy to kill people in Afghanistan”- ok. President Trump, VP Pence and the corrupt GOP -NOT OK!! They need to go.
3
I trust the Iran Agreement with six countries involved: UK, France, China, Russia, Germany and Iran, over a pact between the US and Saudis. The latter, rather than working to create a balance of power in the ME: the Iran Agreement, aim to skew the balance of power in their two favors alone—no holds barred. And if successful will Saudi Arabia want to continue to share the power they gain in their region or be subject to a foreign country? The history of US supported, backed and armed dictators says not - invariably war and chaos follow. Consequence is not something leaders left to their own devices seem to care about. Magical thinking.
4
I can't believe we're having this conversation. I can't even read the article. We are completely untethered. What the?! The quickening in the evangelical base contemplating the Rapture makes a rushing cacophony overhead, so that's something. We've gone from the CIA only has 'feelings' (was that yesterday only?) that MSB ordered the slaying of a Washington Post journalist (on his way to be wed, no less) to launching a conversation about whether MSB is trustworthy enough to have the Bomb.
Cue another op-ed titled, 'Trump is Crude, But He's Right About Saudi Arabia." After two years my opinion is that, if this administration does something right, it's a collision of self-aggrandizement and chance.
Now, where'd I put my rake and my 'I Don't Care Jacket'? There's a forest out back. While raking, I will recite, "Adam & Eve & Pinchme went down to the sea to bathe. Adam & Eve were lost. Who do you think was saved?" Alternatively, I'll whisper the words of a write-in post to a local npr political show re the US response to the Khashoggi killing" "Give us your money and you can kill anyone you want."
2
@koyemsi1
Drat. Messed up the initials..MBS, not MSB.
No. As a matter of fact, it is disturbing in and of itself that they think they have enough pull with the Trump administration to even entertain the notion. What else would Saudi Arabia like? I mean, if we’re in it for the money, let’s at least try to up sell a bit.
I mean, what about accessories? Sure this tech would allow them to start developing warheads, but what about delivery vehicles? Let’s get that on the list. And those missiles don’t run on fossil fuel, so let’s also make sure they’ve got plenty of options there. Now SOME people might say liquid fueling is good enough for a new nuclear program, but the U.S. needs to do right by our customers. King Salman deserves to have solid-state fueling so that if he goes into one of his childish, murderous rages he can launch without advanced notice. And we can’t have them embarrassing themselves with test firings splashing down in the ocean like one of those North Korean knockoffs! For our trusted allies, it’s nothing less than brand-name, AMERICAN guidance systems.
Now I know that seems like a big financial commitment for Salman, but if he’s willing to use U.S. financing, we can sweeten the pot by letting him pre-order future weapons systems. Pretty soon, everyone’s gonna want the new hypersonics. Or maybe we could get him started on a FULL suite of WMDs. Bio-weapons, chemical weapons... think big, Salman! Be somebody!
Next up, I’ve got one word for you: “stealth.” Eh? C’mon, you can fly it off the lot...
3
"Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?" More to the point, can they be trusted not to use a a nuclear bomb? The obvious answer in light of the Khashoggi murder is, nope. Only a fool would trust 'em.
Unfortunately, the same applies to the leaders of the world's number one nuclear power. But with the U.S., there is no question "they" would use it, for they already have proven a willingness to drop the bomb on two horrendous occasions.
It may be particularly telling to ask here, among so many adamant anti-Trumpers, do you tink the U.S. can be trusted with it huge nuclear arsenal while the red telephone is on Donald Trump's desk. And if you don't trust Trump, who then? Might it not make sense to take the nuclear button out of any one individual's hand?
4
At last. An easy question with an easy answer: NO.
Unless this was a trick question. We are just coming out of a song and dance routine by the Saudis about the murder of a journalist, in which they demonstrated a willingness, you might say even an eagerness, to lie.
Why anyone would dream of trusting them not to build a bomb if they had the wherewithal to do it displays an unsubstantial grip on reality.
4
What a mess. US arming the Saudis with the crazy arms deal and now talk of nuclear. The very creators of 911. Islamic demons with endless money from oil. They fit with Trump who admires dictator murderers. Iran provided and yes still provides nuclear material to North Korea whose nuclear capability stemmed from Russian blueprints for rocket design” which of course “was independent engineers” if you believe that. Trump like the Saudis see lives as expendable for money and power.
2
Can they be trusted? In a word, NO.
Why should the Saudis worry about building a nuke? This President would probably sell them a few cheap. Build a few more Trump branded hotels in Riyadh, tell Trump he's pretty and the best POTUS ever and watch the nukes flow in.
1
The Saudi's do not seem to understand nuclear deterrents: the elimination of the first use of an atomic weapon by anyone, anywhere. If they were interested in deterrents, the "...crown prince’s threat to match any Iranian nuclear weapon..." would be approached in another way: by leveraging off the Israeli nuclear weapons capability.
Since the end of the Cold War, Nuclear deterrents seem to be coming in pairs: a Pakistan for every India; an Iran for every Israel.
However unlikely a defense pact between Saudi Arabia and Israel may seem, such an exchange would be seen as a stabilizing force in the region. If the Saudi's want to join the nuclear club, then they need to embrace the use of nuclear deterrents, and the impossibility of a limited nuclear war.
1
First principle being to minimize the risk of spread of nuclear weapons or capabilities.
Saudi and Iran are the lead fighters in the more than a millennia old Sunni-Shia religious war. We should not pick sides. So what we support for both sides should be the same. This includes nucs, Yemen, etc. (at the end of the day we are infidels to both sides anyway.)
1
Undoubtedly, Trump is showing a lot of leniency and granting wat more leverage to the Saudis than is prudent. The jobs promised by the Saudis must always be judged against the facts that a) 15 out of the 19 hijackers in the 911 attack were Saudis and b) the Saudi state is the very antithesis of the American one providing we exclude our homegrown evangelicals who actually share a lot in common with the Saudis. In an ideal world Trump would be locked up and the Saudis would be kept at arm's-length - forever. But when?
1
Trust them? Why is that Q even being asked?
No! We can't. Full stop.
Name a nation that has nuclear power, as access to the materials,and enough cash lay around, that has not gone forward with at least trying to develop nuclear weapons?
We Americans are either amazingly naive, or simply self-inflicted delusional. Or both. But delusion seems to be the larger affliction of what we as a nation most suffer. So much delusion infuses our culture...its hard to figure how we get anything done.
Yes, SA, under MBS, will move to develop nuclear weapons...if they are not already doing so in preparation of being given access to good quality USofA nuclear materials. It would not be a leap to consider that SA/MBS is already in the process of buying the necessary materials to get a nuke program off the ground as fast as they can...once the US green-lights the power program.
Why does SA need nuclear power? When it could be easily converting to renewables, on a mass scale, and being a front runner in their adoption. Their urban needs are nowhere near the amounts that a few nuclear power-plants would provide them. Rural adoption of renewables would be quick and sufficient for those needs. And they could easily hold that development over the US - as China would be all over that potential market. Forcing the US to hand them the tech, and build it!
Why?
1. SA is simply unwilling to develop their own infrastructure and/or industries, other then oil production.
2. They want nukes!
3
I read these comments to know whether or not Trump's daily absurdity makes sense or not to NYTimes readers. Thank God that I'm not the only one to think that giving the shady looking dude on the cover of today's newspaper the bomb is one of the dumbest ideas to come along in quite a while. America is in a fight for its life from the daily attacks by a president who clearly does not have its best interests in mind. That our own president would continually put us into these situations just blows my mind. Stand strong against whatever this Trump phenomenon is. Sam, John and Abigail Adams, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, John Hancock, Paul Revere and the rest of the founding gang, I'm sure, are looking down on us and praying that we do just that.
1
A tyrant, with extremely bloody hands, meaning that he is judged to have savagely terminated the life of another person or those of other persons for actively challenging, say, an established doctrine, policy, or institution – all of tyrannical nature and gravity. Often the victim, a social or political dissident; in the plural sense of so, the victims, also social and political dissidents, may be described by the totalitarian regime as "enemies of the state;” the same regime that can be known to have said to be the sole arbiter of competence, but in practical terms instead proves to not even be a mediocre. This was exactly what columnist Jamal Khashoggi first wanted to prove if his native land of Saudi Arabia were to liberate itself from the chain of totalitarian misrule or simply of totalitarianism, particularly of Sunny Islam type and gravity. Overall, a grossly incompetent regime that would pre-emptively use the bomb against even those perceived to be "enemies of the state” Not what the civilized world is inclined to see occurring.
"Saudis Want a U.S. Nuclear Deal. Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?"
The Saudis, who have for decades hardly distinguished themselves by their commitment to forthrightness and aboveboard dealings, want (a) nuclear power plants and (b) to produce its own nuclear fuel, high cost notwithstanding.
Further, they sit on enormous oil reserves in a region that is ideal for harvesting solar energy, and they have more than enough capital for developing a comprehensive solar energy infrastructure.
And we have to ask if they can be trusted not to build a nuclear weapon? C'mon. I might be old, but I'm not stupid.
2
This is the biggest story of the year! It connects so many dots! It explains why Kushner told Trump on day 1 that the US needed to have a more friendly relationship with SA. Trump & Kushner are being paid by SA to broker a deal so they can get nuclear weapons. Its why Trump didn't condemn SA's killing of Khashoggi, bec that would jeopardize the deal. Khashoggi was killed bec he knew something and SA didn't want him talking. Its why Trump killed the Iran nuclear deal. So much corruption! But in the end the world is going to have an expansion of nuclear weapons in the most dangerous area of the world. Climate change may need to be #2 for the greatest threat on this planet. And where is Congress??? Keep on this NYT! Job well done! And I'm scared as hell. When does this nightmare end?
1
Trusting anyone with nuclear material or technology is at the apex of security concerns. Trusting a country with a medieval religious culture, a dictatorship with a history of ill treatment toward its women and non-Wahabi religionists is nearly unthinkable. Then we have the brutal Khashoggi murder involving the arrogant tyrant, Mohamed bin Salman. Just astonishing. Perhaps SA can buy what it wants elsewhere, perhaps not, but a Saudi guarantee of "trust me" is certain to blow up. Bottom line, there are two mega leaders in the Muslim world, Iran religionists led by Iran, and Sunni religionists led by Saudi Arabia: that is, two religious groups who've been at each other for hundreds of years occasionally in uneasy peace but often as parties in conflict. Keeping them nuclear-unarmed should be a top priority.
5
@Shillingfarmer One has to wonder why this president was so eager to tear up the accord with Iran. Is it some special knowledge of foreign affairs or just appalling ignorance in a man without a moral compass.
The Trump Administration has had very inexperienced and ignorant representatives such as Jared Kushner and Rick Perry representing United States interests with the Saudi government. It is clear that the current King and his Crown Princeson are vicious dictators who will murder people to stop them from criticizing their government.
Why on earth would the United States give nuclear bombs to the country which supplied 19 of the 20 murderers who destroyed the World Trade Center and killed 3000 people on 9/11/2001?
Trump loves murderers, autocrats, and inherited power/money. He wants to perpetuate his rule through his descendants.
Why is the legislative branch of government allowing him to exercise such illegal and immoral power with no checks and balances?
6
I miss the times when they at least pretended it wasn't all about money, and applied some political spin to the sound bites.
Can we go back to that so I can be blissfully ignorant again?
1
What could possibly go wrong if we gave the country, really the extremist family, that has supported and developed extreme Islam for the passed 80 or so years the bomb. I just can't imagine.
5
Reality check its clear no one can be trusted these days. People fail to understand nukes today are 100 times more powerfull then those used in japan. Why arms race is moving into dangerous grounds.USA must be a first strike option now because world leaders gone crazy.
Would you give a 5-year old an AK-47? Aren't the Saudis killing enough people in Yemen? Why would you give this brutal, thuggish government the means to wipe out huge numbers of people, Mr. President? So you can build a few Trump towers in Saudi Arabia?
2
Sure thing. Who wouldn’t decide that giving a murderer nukes sounds like a great plan?
1
China is more than willing to take their order for “ anything” the Prince So desires! Just like they have done in most all of Africa since the USA has given up their leadership roll there...
2
Saudis Want a U.S. Nuclear Deal. Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?
If you have to ask...
2
Here's what's going to happen:
US will aid the Saudis in acquiring nuclear technology and fuel-making facilities;
The Saudis will use that knowledge and equipment to develop nuclear arms, claiming they are needed for defense against the Iranians;
The Iranians will abandon the treaty that the US has already effectively killed off, and develop their own nuclear arms;
The Israelis will put their nuclear forces on alert to defend against the Iranians, and perhaps the Saudis as well.
And World War III will begin in the cauldron of the Middle East, bombing the entire world back to a radioactive Stone Age.
This probable scenario is more evidence than anyone should require that the Trump administration is totally without a moral compass, that it prefers violence and the threat of violence to honest negotiation, and that it is--to put no fine point upon it--dangerous and stupid beyond belief.
2
What a terrible idea. Presumes the stability of the Saudi regime in the world’s least stable area. Saudi gets the bomb -> Islamist revolution -> Bin Laden Jr. is the new ‘caliph’ of Saudi. They finish what they started on 9/11.
2
In a word, no.
2
The US should not fear a nuclear Iran. We should be massively afraid of a nuclear Saudi Arabia. They did, after all, produce 15 of the 9/11 terrorists
3
Bad moment. Let's be clear. What's the difference between the horrific murderous drive by those heads chopping ISIS warriors and the circle around the crown prince MbS?
3
Absolutely trust them with NUKES.
Let's just end the world sooner rather than later.
3
Can the Saudi’s be trusted not to build a nuclear weapon? In a word, “No.” The series Saudi fairy tales regarding the responsibility for murder and dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi, both a journalist for the Washington Post and a US permanent resident, demonstrates just that statements from the Saudi officials cannot and should not ever be believed.
There’s another fact that has arisen that the Saudi’s have every intention of building a nuclear weapon. Anyone who knows the history of the development of the first nuclear weapon will know that the most important capability to enable its development is the ability to create “bomb grade” nuclear fuel. This capability requires a massive level of investment and machinery to generate fast-fissionable, nuclear bomb grade material. And the Saudis want to have this capability. Once a country has obtained bomb-grade material, the problem of creating a nuclear weapon is a straight-forward engineering problem with numerous, well-known solutions. The North Korean nuclear program is a textbook example.
Finally, should the Saudi’s acquire a nuclear weapon before Iran does, I think there is little doubt that they’ll use it on Iran. I’m certain that the Saudis know that three to four U235-based Hiroshima-sized weapons would wipeout Tehran; three more would destroy three other large cities. In a single large strike, Saudi Arabia could wipeout most of the population of their greatest enemy, Iran: creating horrible problems for the rest of us.
6
The NY Times, which used its considerable influence to bolster support for President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, an enemy who cheers in unison for the death of America and destruction of Israel at every opportunity, is now asking if Saudi Arabia can be trusted not to build a bomb.
Neither situation has anything to do with trust. Our determination to stem the proliferation of nuclear weapons must be considered sacrosanct, and in the best interest of every country. The military advantages of nuclear capacity are too enticing to ignore, and the governments of Saudi Arabia and Iran have both exhibited their desire for supremacy in the region.
Of course, sovereign countries have every right to develop nuclear technology as a viable alternative to the fossil fuels which damage the environment and keep dictatorships afloat, but the inherent danger posed by nuclear weapons necessitates absolute transparency and a willingness to accept unimpeded inspections and regulation by the IAEA. Any country which has shown a propensity for regional domination and seeks to limit the IAEA's access or authority has no business splitting atoms.
1
@Gary Taustine The Iran deal was a different matter than selling the Saudis nuclear power. A false equivalency. Trump has no knowledge of the globe; he has no diplomatic skills, nor does he have any common sense or moral compass.
@Gary Taustine
Not sure where you were going with your first paragraph, but I agree with you on the rest. North Korea should act as a cautionary tale for anyone thinking nuclear technology is inaccessible to any but advanced technology nations. All nations have a stake in absolutely no proliferation of enrichment. Not negotiable.
Trump has made it clear that the almighty dollar "Trumps' the sanctity of human life and common decency.
He will certainly try to push this deal forward.
The Saudi's cannot be trusted.
Trump cannot be trusted.
So where does this leave us?
7
Netanyahu wanted Trump to tear up the Iran deal.
That has the potential to create an arms race between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
How does that help Israel?
Of course, Israel has nuclear weapons and refuses to sign the non-proliferation agreement.
Iran - population 82 million
Saudi Arabia - population 33 million
Israel - population 9 million
Roughly 125 million people create the potential for a nuclear disaster for the rest of the 7.5 billion people?
3
@Independent
Who knows how it helps Israel. I am certain that Israel has thought deeper into than Trump or his minions are capable of.
My guess is a broad license for pre-emptive strikes. It's a horrible idea but would any US administration stop them? Not a chance.
Israel's release of "secret stolen papers" was just PR.
We didn't learn anything we hadn't know for more than 10 years.
From the Washington Post:
"The stolen documents contain no revelations about recent nuclear activity and no proof that Iran has violated the 2015 nuclear accord it reached with the United States and five other global powers."
"U.S. officials had long known of Iran’s pre-2004 nuclear weapons research, which the Obama administration cited explicitly in prodding Iran to accept the historic deal limiting its ability to make enriched uranium and placing its nuclear facilities under intensive international oversight."
On the other hand, Israel is estimated to have between 60 and 400 nuclear missiles which they won't admit to nor will they sign the non-proliferation treaty.
So is it any surprise Iran and Saudi Arabia also want nuclear missiles?
Saudis may be behind Trump's abrogation of the Iran treaty. If Iran takes the bait and resumes their nuclear program then Saudis will have justification for a program of their own which Trump will find appealing. With nuclear weapons Saudis can vaporize Shiite Tehran, or Sana'a, or Jerusalem, whatever seems like a good idea to them at the time.
Saudi Arabia is ideally situated to become a major solar power producer. Choosing nuclear power would only make sense as a first step towards developing nuclear weapons. Recalling that 15 of the 19 9-11 attackers were Saudi, it is not in our interests to sell them a nuclear power plant.
4
Insane: America is going to discover, soon, that it was in large measure its "moral authority" that allowed it to so mightily thrive after WWII. When all is said and done, the United States will be a colony of China, China style: no guns, no slaves, just overwhelming force: "With 6.5 million undergraduates and 0.5 million postgraduates studying science, engineering, and medicine, China already has the world's largest scientific workforce." We think we live in the world alone and that we can do anything we want, anytime we want, to anyone we want. We shall see. Non-proliferation works not because of any international monitoring that is done but, in large measure, because the world "trusted" the major powers to act rationally. That's over.
3
@anthonyadverse excellent and far-reaching critical analysis. Hopefully the likely breakup of the US will permit several new nation-states to be formed by 2025. Otherwise, China will move in for the kill.
Trump backs out of a nuclear deal with Iran that inspectors assured was working
The he sends Perry to discuss a deal that will add nuclear capability for the Saudi’s.
The mind boggles.
4
I don't think that the correct question in our president mind is Trust?
he is more in to how much you pay me for this ?
2
A country with literally unlimited access to oil-fired energy. Because it's 'clean', it's the future, it's...
2
Interesting how our "progressives" perceive things - O.K. for Obama and H. Clinton to sell Russia US uranium mines, but not O.K. to sell Saudi Arabia nuclear reactor designs. Somewhat inconsistent positions.
@jaco
Most interesting is how Trump supporters twist their facts around. You appear to refer to the sale of privately owned property rights in US uranium mines. You can read up on the details here.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/21/opinion/uranium-deal-clinton-russia.html
If so, do you propose that The Government should nationalize those mines? Should their foreign owners be compensated for the taking, using your tax dollars? If so, should The Government also nationalize other critical resources? Oil, gas, steel... where does it end.
I remember when the right wing honed to free markets like a religion. Trump seems to have turned that inside out, like everything else he touches. Weird that progressives now support the free market and national security, while the hard right supports Trump. Go figure. Sheep gotta love their demagogue.
The Saudi's want what all rogue regimes want ..And some already have ..Nuclear weapons ..It insures that They are not overthrown.If anyone (besides trump ) believes that this country awash in oil wants electricity from nuclear sources they are naive
1
Let's have a look at who is involved in these negotiations.
On one side we have Mr. "Oops I forgot"Perry who despite his new glasses is not Ernetz Moniz.
On the other side we have MBS. What can I say. This is the man who broke Saudi diplomatic relationship with Canada because of a Tweet.
Anyone who thinks that helping a Saudi Arabia under MBS acquiring nuclear energy is a good idea, must have his head examined.
Saudi Arabia already has a "mini nuclear weapon" thanks to its dominant position in the crude oil market.
The Iranian nuclear program began under the Shah, with the help of the US. We all know what happened since.
History tends to repeat itself. At least the Shiites in Iran are not the one responsible of all of the terrorist attacks in the World. Sunnis indoctrinated by Saudi Wahhabism are. So go ahead and give Saudi Arabia nuclear technology. I'm sure the US desperately needs those $80 Billion.
3
Can they be trusted?
No more than Trump can be trusted.
Worrying and dangerous times.
6
How can you even ask the question? Of course, SA can’t and shouldn’t be trusted after lying through its royal teeth about the murder of a mild but dedicated dissident.
SA needs the world’s condemnation; otherwise, it is just being enabled by weak and tragically flawed leaders, such as, um, Donald Trump.
1
This only gets worse. How will it end?
2
What difference does it really make? They have enough money to buy and sell almost anyone or anything on this planet. This reminds me (and relates) of A. Q. Khan, a Pakistani nuclear physicist who founded the uranium enrichment program for Pakistan's atomic bomb project. Only after the US approached Pakistan with their findings,
did Khan admit to selling nuclear weapon plans to other countries (including North Korea, the US believes). Pakistan denied any knowledge of this nuclear proliferation. Sure thing. And Trump is more intelligent than Albert Einstein. Regardless, I think why not Saudi Arabia? So, it's not if, it's when.
1
The Saudis should be made to understand that any attempt to gain a nuclear capability will result in the name of their country no longer containing the word Saudi.
1
Now that we've shown utter weakness and willingness to do whatever the Saudis want in exchange for favorable oil prices, the economic illiterate-in-chief will be all too ready with his Sharpie to ink such deal. Yep, this is America winning.
1
Wake up; realize that west and east are different in their planning, thinking, negotiating, lying, politics, honesty, respect, social awareness and means of control as much as possible. Just as China is trying, US currently is, Russia dreams of and Great Britain has controlled. Global or local control of Markets and commerce, defense, Sources (WATER!) Values and Religions, even space. Saudis may be our friends, would't it be nice if they die while defending us? It wan't happen,they too, in smaller scale seek control. Israel needs control for its markets and menages quite well to fit in to the Middle East, Depending on wisdom how to act in two Moral levels; Western manners Vs. Mid- Eastern ways. Saudis are totally East; we must not let them have Nuclear bombs, and neither Iran. Proliferation is sure danger. We could benefit and guard by providing harmless Atomic fuel just as everything else, And stay friend and ally. Globalization should mean that ALL are having their national needs met; Water, Electric power, Food, Health with some wealth, available through Commerce, not Treat of war nor Chocking. Trump may be nasty or smart Merchant, but see how he is played with, by leaders from eastern world, who may be even smarter nastier Merchants. America should stay Guard, with values that MUST have a heavy say in relations with each country. This is Leading and holding on and being Respected. This is strength against falling into the trap.They may be gangs, we are not.
2
We are building our own competitors. I thought, as a business man, Trump understood that risk concept. In 2001 Saudis flew two aircraft into the World Trade Center killing more Americans than were killed at Pearl Harbor not to mention triggered two wars costing us trillions, major set back, plus all the subsequent cost of hunting down and killing another Saudi Osama Bin Laden, Al Qeda and ISIL. I ask, we're really just supposed to forget all that? That all happened in trumps home town? Not to mention the Destrution at the Pentagon and Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where Trump memorialize the heroes abord one of the planes in 2018 . Trump himself claimed to oppose those wars in Iraq and Afganistan? At that time we said "Never Forget" 911. All patriotic Americans took that and "United We Stand " to heart. I say if Trump even tries to table a proposal to set them up with nuclear capability, both the entire Senate and entire Congress grow a spine and use their common sense to deny any such action. I say let our adversaries sell them nukes. That leaves our advesaries in violation of nuclear proliferation treay not us and keeps our state If the art American weapon technology out of their hands. This is a simple No brainer. And if this slips through Trumps fingers it just shows he has no concern for his home state and the security of ALL AMERICANS.
Not making this an excuse, but I think people are failing to realize that if the US doesn’t build these reactors for them, the Russians or Chinese will.
Obviously we don’t want any nation in that region to have nukes, especially ones that believe that nonsense about westerners being infidels.
With that said, by having the US do it, there would be covert ways for the US to monitor what is going on there instead of being left in the dark if another nation builds them.
I think the US should just offer them a nuclear umbrella and avoid the reactors in all.
7
@Jonathan
The argument that "if the US doesn't do this other countries will" is silly. The US should lead assemble an international coalition of countries that would together prevent the Saudis from acquiring the ability to make nuclear weapons. China and Russia should be included. The larger aim would be to prevent a nuclear arms race in the middle east, and at the same time push strongly for better energy sources in the Middle East, e.g., solar power. A fit and competent White House would, in any case, do that.
13
@Jonathan
OK. Let's say the U.S. builds the nuclear plant and they covertly find that the Saudis are really building a nuclear bomb. What does the U.S. do then?
When you have information, usually there has to be an action plan, to act on that information.
5
@Jonathan
Not to split hairs, but the issue revolves around enrichment, not reactors. The Saudis are insisting that they run their own enrichment program as a condition of buying US reactor plans.
That should freak us out. The much maligned Obama deal with Iran dealt directly with enrichment. Trump dumped that deal. Now the Saudis want enrichment. One wonders if the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran deal was a chess move to make Saudi enrichment more palatable. That level of sophistication might be less worrisome if not for the fact that Rick Perry is running the show. The guy running the department didn't know what it did when he ran for office. I don't think he's any smarter about it now and even less so about the geo-politics of nuclear proliferation.
Trump is easier to understand; just show me the money (and tax returns, please).
7
Hopefully, during this negotiation and subsequent implementation, the Secretary of Energy won't need to remember more than two details.
Off to the arms race, nuclear option in installed.
Sovereign nations ought to be able to control their own fate, generally. However, in the case of nuclear power, the shrunken gap to nuclear weapons available to nations with enrichment technology presents a deep dilemma. Such nations, exercising their sovereignty, become able to reach out and alter the fate of other sovereigns.
I submit that nations harboring long stranding animosity with others ought to not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. That implies a zero tolerance policy for enrichment technology. Since that technology is primarily an engineering problem, it is becoming harder for the world of nations to control rogue development programs. This is no place for a laissez faire approach, our for a money grab for the development business. It is a place for hard nosed, zero tolerance deal making. E.g. we'll build and run the enrichment facilities to produce fuel from your ore, Saudi Arabia, and you won't build any enrichment. Same with Iran and all others. The "we" here is the U.N, not the USA. We can easily see why since the rise of Trump and his associated ism.
As individuals, we all surrender some of our "personal sovereignty" as a trade for a safer and better ordered society. It is high time and long overdue for world nations to behave similarly. Otherwise we'll end up blowing ourselves to smithereens in the name of a non-functional concept of national sovereignty.
4
Let's see. Israel has nuclear weapons; Iran will soon have nuclear weapons (thanks to Trump abandoning the Iran nuclear pact); and, again thanks to Trump, Saudi Arabia will soon have nuclear weapons.
What could go wrong? Oh, the extinction of the human race, but other than that?
25
@Davym: No, not human extinction. There are too many of humans with wide distribution. Instead look at the upside: It could become a short sharp shock which creates a lasting peace in the Mideast and abruptly weans the world from oil.
@Davym
Just throw in the kooky evangelical types in Trump's midst, particularly Pence. Some of these maniacs actually believe that war and massive bloodshed are part of the 'Lord's Plan'. We are all in big trouble.
2
@Davym
Well, we could finally get that glass-like surface all over the Middle East. Much like some Hawks have been so long wishing for...
For the US it's not a question of trust. It's a question of how much they're willing to pay us. Happy Thanksgiving! #thankful
11
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is lame enough to use the technology to make a bomb, so probably let them make reactors to generate electricity but don’t give them the means to enrich fuel.
Realistically, there are no countries between the Mediterranean, Red Sea, South of Turkey or West of Iran and Afghanistan that could survive a nuclear weapon attack. For those countries one device could create so much damage that they would be disrupted for decades. Basically, they might launch a decisive nuclear attack but they would not survive to take any victory laps.
1
Two years before Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba was assassinated, followed a year later by the death of Dag Hammarskjold, the General Atomics of San Diego built the nuclear reactor, known as TRICOR 1 at the Univ. of Kinshasa, just as the Belgian Congo colonial rule began to disappear and the Democratic Republic of Congo began to evolve. The exception was in the Belgian ruled Katanga Province, where the Shinkolobwe mine uranium was some of the purest in the world, used in the building of the first Atomic bomb and still of great importance to western powers. The Russians at this time also wanted this uranium so a proxy war developed between the SSR and the US, while the nationalisation of Belgian interests by the new Congo government would have brought about further national disintegration and
continental upheaval. The mid-east now is a similar keg of gunpowder that should not be ignited by the nuclear development of Saudi Arabia. The mideast is to volatile and the world instead wishes to see all of the nuclear powers ratchet down their war footings.
5
Can Saudis be trusted? This is a question that doesn't need any consideration or an answer.
Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard was right when she said Trump was Saudi Arabia's slave.
18
@Jack The Saudis have promised to be trumps banker and help him spread his brand across the ME. That's all he cares about.
It's not a matter of trust. The Saudis have Trump's complete attention and cooperation. There is one reason, and only one, as to why Trump seems oblivious to the harm he's doing to the country with his tolerance of Saudi Arabia's numerous abuses.
No matter what he says (which from someone who lies constantly should be questioned in any case) he and his family have extensive business interests with Saudi Arabia which would be jeopardized if he tried to make them accountable for their actions.
It's not rocket science. Let me repeat. The man lies. All the time.
16
This discussion should end with a big "No!", long before issues of practicality, trustworthiness, proliferation, or Iran enter the picture.
No, the Saudis do not need nuclear electricity. They have plenty of sunlight, not only far more than they need for themselves, but for export. That eliminates the need to make a false choice between two bads, nuclear power and fossil fuel power. They have a large workforce that needs training, and it's far easier and cheaper to train solar installers than nuclear technicians. As they led the world in fossil fuel production, they could lead the mid-east, and possibly the world, in solar energy installation and production.
Long before Mohammed ben Salman either asked, a la King Henry II asking about Thomas Becket, "Is there no one to rid me of this turbulent priest?" or explicitly ordered Jamal Khashoggi killed, the dictatorial and corrupt nature of the Saudi royal family rendered it unfit to rule over their fellow Saudis, and the fanatical nature of Wahhbism rendered the Saudis unfit to rule over anyone else. Lest anyone doubt the moral depravity of the royal family, simply consider its complicity in the malnutrition, starvation and deaths of millions of Yemenis.
Similarly, Donald Trump is morally and temperamentally unfit to be President, especially after his comments about valuing US arms sales over US moral principles. At least, unlike his Democratic and Republican predecessors, he's honest about it.
9
No.
No!
A million times no!
I can just hear the "But this will mean X amount of money for us!" argument from trump and his sycophants.
First they tear up the Iran nuclear deal, now this is even being discussed? I can think of no quicker way to seeing a nuclear Iran, and nuclear war or nuclear terrorism.
I am honestly confused- I thought trump was just greedy and hated Latinos, but does he actually want to kill us all?
As narcissistic as he is, I would not be surprised if he thought, "Well, I don't have very much time left to be alive, so maybe nobody else should get to live either."
Get moving, Mueller! The next Congress cannot arrive quickly enough.
9
Short answer: No. Long answer: No!
5
My Answer is actually a question.
What is happening? ( imagine it is said in a way 1st hangover movie after leaving wedding chapel of Las vegas in a police car scene)
4
Seriously, do we need to even ask if they can be trusted. Wow, get a grip, they are just Trump with more money.
6
@jacnglen
Or Trump is just MBS except much older, uglier and with much less money. No wonder Trump is acting like his puppy dog.
1
There is no reason for Saudi Arabia not to follow the same philosophy which dominates Trump's thinking---my country first, or my country only----even if the rest of globe suffers. This type of approach is suitable for the authoritarian personality, which relishes utter control of whatever part of the globe he/she rules, and does not mind if other rulers do the same wherever they control. That MBS is that type of person has been made manifestly clear in the Khashoggi murder. MBS joins Trump and Kim in wishing mainly to completely control a segment of mankind without any concern for humanity at large. For this reason Trump ignores climate change . For this reason Trump has allowed Kim to go his merry way with building more and better nuclear bombs. And for this reason it would not trouble him if MBS built his bombs. An authoritarian personality can be very dangerous for the survival of humanity.
1
So if they had not killed Khasshogi is such a terrifying manner, would this have even been a headline? I am cynical, the US government hardly punished the Saudi's after 9/11 and that was Khasshogi 1000x. What makes this special? It's not just Trump, it's a whole parade of rich Americans in bed with the Saudi's. How about naming businesses selling out the morals of our nation? How about investigating which American businesses are intimately connected with the Saudis that we the public can boycott, because if we have learned anything from Bug's Life, it's that the common person does have power. It comes from unifying for a just cause, the morals that define a large swathe of American citizens, cripple those corrupt American businesses in a way that hurts most, in their wallets.
3
@Meena
As I hit submit, I realised how naive and theoretical my premise is. Really would any of us be able to collect a paycheque? Perhaps the reality is we are not a superpower by ourselves, we are being coddled and indulged by the world at large and blinding ourselves on being financially independent. We really need money from the deep pockets of the Saudi's and the Chinese and all the so called bad guys the world around. And I don't have money to go buy a one way ticket on any of those space ships being assembled.....
1
Trump white house is the reality show version of SNL.
Trump always defend himself in this way; CIA concluded that way but then I spoke wıth MBS he saıd no so I trust him.
that is it.
If you ask Trump this question, he will 100% says I trust Saudi's .
2
"Asked in Congress last March about his secret negotiations with the Saudis, Energy Secretary Rick Perry dodged a question about whether the Trump administration would insist that the kingdom be banned from producing nuclear fuel."
When is Mitch McConnell and his DO NOTHING band of gutless GOP senators going to stand up to Trump and say "ENOUGH!"
Can Saudi prince, bin Salmen, be trusted?
The insulting Khashoggi blatant lies and denials are rock solid proof of a big fat NO.
4
Give nuclear technology to a nation that sent dozens to fly passenger planes into world trade center, pentagon and white house. What could possibly go wrong?
8
Considering that they were the ones who actually attacked us on 911, I think not. They are basically a family of gangster's who took over a country (It could just as well be Farquad Arabia) and run it for their own benefit, while they promote another phony baloney religious ideology to gull the feeble-minded into putting up with their blatant criminality and hypocrisy (sort of like Trump and his Evangelical - just another bunch of crooked businessmen extorting money out of Fox addled rubes and morons - and neither of them should have access to anything remotely nuclear.)
4
Be worried. The world nuclear weapons piles: Russia 6850, US 6550, France 300, China 280, UK 215, Pakistan 150, India 130, Israel 80, North Korea 20 (ploughshares.org, 11/23/18). trump has befriended Russia, Israel, and North Korea who all want more nuclear capability and now we believe his is preparing to enable one of the worlds richest nations.
Iran is not listed as having a stock pile, but trump pulled out of the peace treaty so now we cannot even inspect its facilities, instead we will make false charges and punish a country out of blind hatred. Saudi Arabia is not listed and when awarded nuclear capability by the US, trump will SAY the US has inspection rights but it’s doubtful that trump will require actual inspections. Meanwhile, when Saudi Arabia continues it Yemen war and then initiates an Iran war, trump will echo Pompeo, "It's a nasty world out there."
trump pulled out of the Nuclear arms treaty, thereby removing the cuffs of responsibility to other nations and holding other nations accountable.
Remember trump’s logic: what’s the use of having nuclear weapons if you don’t use them?
4
9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, 9/11 Wahhabism, Wahhabism, Wahhabism =
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
11
Since our foreign policy is transactional, just imaine the profits to be generated from an 80 million middle-class educated consumer market, currently untapped for US business.
That is Iran.
But of course, if Trump stopped the trade sanctions on Iran, Sheldon Adelson would turn off the money spigot for Trump's re-election.
That's how our foreign policy goes these days. America 0, Trump 1.
6
You have GOT to be kidding! Look at what the Saudis are doing in Yemen. And Trump wants to give them Nuke Capability? Is Trump afraid they have put out a fatwa on him!?
2
Wow, a nuclear armed Saudi King. What a concept. Please remind me why we're even thinking about it. I'm having a problem wrapping my head around the idea. It's a bit like putting a rope around our necks while balancing on a one legged stool. Can we be that self-destructive? I never quote Nancy Reagan but this time I must: "Just say no."
3
The Crown Prince is young, naive, and more than likely responsible for the death of Mr. Khashoggi. The thought of Saudi Arabia having nuclear weapons, let alone Iran, is hair-rising.
2
Is this some kind of pathetic joke?
2
Sure, let's give a certified hot-headed murderer the kind of nuclear capacity we've been fighting for decades to keep Iran from having, what could go wrong?
Maybe we should and maybe we shouldn't.
It would create Billion$$$$$ in helping make America great again.
Jared says the Prince is a "top shelf" kind of guy and can be trusted.
The Saudi's would never harm the USA.
The Saudi's would not use nuclear force and only have a stockpile of weapons to protect peace in the Middle East.
Would I lie to the American people? No, I purvey real fact, not fake news....
(please don't believe me)
3
I'd trust them as far as I could throw a severed limb... same for Trump....
1
My comments from the NYT October 20, 2018 article Titled,
"Saudis’ Image Makers: A Troll Army and a Twitter Insider":
Chris
Cave Junction Oct. 21
You think this is bad now, just wait until they buy a few dozen nukes. (Why bother slogging through years of R&D?)
Matt
Arkansas Oct. 21
@Chris It will never, ever happen.
_________________________________
Hey Matt from Arkansas, I hope you're right!
3
Prince Mohammed bin Salman with Nukes? What could go wrong?
Curious that there’s no reaction from Israel here. How would Israel feel about nuclear material or bombs in the hands of Sunni extremists?
4
One can visualize a scary scenario emerging from this stupid Trump administration move. Iran was close to producing nuclear weapons when the 2015 nuclear deal brokered by the Obama administration successfully discouraged it from proceeding further. Trump’s pathological hatred for Obama and Iran made him pull the U.S. out of the deal. Thanks to pressures from other parties to the deal, Iran has been tenuously clinging to it.
The nuclear deal that the Trump team is now negotiating with Saudi Arabia has given Iran a good reason to discard it and revive its stalled nuclear programs. If the proposed Saudi-U.S. deal materializes, the world is going to witness a mutually destructive Saudi-Iranian nuclear arms race.
It is a shame that Trump and his minions who absolved the crafty crown prince of Saudi Arabia of his involvement in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi should negotiate with him on a risky deal like this one. It is safe to bet that he will renege on its term. And Trump will find a way to defend him, the same way he did vis-à-vis the Khashoggi murder.
If the Saudis have balked on U.N. oversight of their nuclear programs, the reason is clear: Their ultimate goal is to produce nuclear weapons. And their first target would be Iran.
Are there enough members of Congress principled enough to rise above party politics and stop President Trump from going ahead with this deal? Let him look other ways to curry favor with Saudi Arabia and its murderous crown prince.
1
Saudis wanted that journalist dead. Can they be trusted to be open about it, much less trusted not to have killed him ?
What type of a silly question this article poses. I didn't bother to read the article at all.
1
This whole debate gives me serious doubts about our own democracy that puts so many incompetent idiots in charge of world security.
At least in a third world country the people can rise and overthrow the despot ( replacing him with another). But here; we can’t even impeach this president who is destroying the pillars of the same democracy that put him in the White House.
2
Trusted? Nope.
1
Soi we can trust Saudi's for what?
flying planes in to the Chicago-LA skyscrapers.
Are you Insane...…………………………
in the second hand I would like to see Saudi's have their own Nuclear weapons with Iranians so they stop playing war ganes on Poor Muslims, instead they start to annihilate them selves.
I believe at this moment Saudi-Iran conflict costed poor Muslims more than 5 million lives.
They are not trustworthy. They have starved over 85,000 children to death in Yemen. They are as bad an actor as there is in the world. The only benefit would come if Iran, Saudi Arabia and Russia all Nuked each other at the same time. They are all led by vicious dictators.
1
I do not think there should be any worries about Saudis building atomic bombs, using nuclear waste from nuclear power plants.
In the last 100 years, the indigenous Saudi population has been relying primarily on guest-workers for technical expertise. Their children also have shown little desire to pursue science; they largely stay at home watching soccer games and playing electronic games.
If one day there will be a "Saudi-made" atomic bomb, it has to be either an imported one or built inside by a group of outsiders. So, by knowing what is coming in and who is working there and what expertise they have, the West will easily know what is going on.
2
This is a truly bad idea. Can’t they develop solar power instead?
8
@Anne-Marie O’Connor
Of course solar makes more sense for them. Panels on roofs intercepting solar energy would cool buildings at the same time as they provide power.
4
Nuclear nonproliferation backed by the threat of war, that's what we have said to North Korea and Iran. Saudi Arabia is the last nation on earth that should get the technology.
Saudi Arabia is using its clout in the petroleum energy sector to coerce the world's superpower to hand over nuclear technology. That's right, strong arm the world's superpower.
Where will this coercion end? Saudi Arabia knows our economy is fragile and without just the right balance between supply and demand it can put the world's superpower into a tailspin.
Saudi Arabia knows that our military uses 100 to 150 million barrels of petroleum per year to defend our economy (depending on the posture). A spike in oil prices would make that war much more expensive yet the task for the G.I.'s would still be the same.
Our military is toothless in its mission to defend the U.S. economy when it comes to Saudi Arabia! Will the U.S. invade Saudi Arabia like Iraq? No! Because the supply of oil would become disrupted and prices would spike, and everything we've been kowtowing over to the Saudis regarding reliable oil supplies would be negated and jeopardized.
MBS has Trump and America over a barrel, he knows it, and this killing of Khashoggi might as well have been a demonstration that they can publicly neuter the U.S. leadership and get away with it, showing that Saudi Arabia has control over the worlds superpower.
What's the difference between being a superpower and the nation that controls it?
7
@Chris
I'm usually the first one to debunk conspiracy theories but, in this case, I can't help wondering how early in Trump's rise discussions about Saudi nuclear technology began. Could it be that pulling out of the Iranian nuclear deal was a planned precursor paving the way for Trump's HUGE BEAUTIFUL nuclear technology deal with Saudi Arabia? I'm at the point of cynicism where this seems highly likely, and it stinks to high heaven. Call me naive, but the almighty dollar cannot be the primary reason we conduct foreign policy.
1
@Chris I believe you are mistaken with your analysis. The day the that the US needs oil and Saudi Arabia refuses, we’ll just take it from them. That’s how the real world works
@Tiger shark -- Yes, of course, in theory, however, it is impossible to pump oil if there is a full scale regional war going on, and we know those can go on for a long time. Why didn't we just attack them in 1973, were we burnt out over Vietnam, why not push back now well after Iraq has settled down, why are we bowing to them now? I think most analysts would point out that going and taking Iran's, Iraq's or Saudi Arabia's oil without their consent is not so easy. For that matter, why not just take it from Venezuela? And in order to maintain any worldwide leadership, we must not just steal the oil, we must pay for it, and how do you simultaneously pay for natural resources from the nation(s) you're waging full scale war on?
True, the US invasion of Iraq was explicitly engineered to show the rest of the world that when we want the oil we need, we'll just take it, and how well did that work out? Well, China's getting a lot of it now and we pretty much lost face. The US is not just going to go up against Saudi Arabia without precipitating a disaster that would upend OPEC and the world's oil supply, and that would upset a lot of other nations. No, we can't "just take it from them."
We cannot trust the Saudis. Do not do this deal.
5
The irony of Kushner having a part in arming a nation that is a sworn enemy of Israel with the bomb boggles the mind. That Netanyahu has not already gone ballistic is amazing. The only possible comfort that can be drawn from this article is that a Democrat controlled house can at least make the process of Armageddon a little more difficult for Trump to trigger.
3
This is a window into the future about how the world will end.
7
"....Rick Perry dodged a question about whether the Trump administration would insist that the kingdom be banned from producing nuclear fuel."
Maybe water boarding has some valid uses after all.
3
@Ancient
Most likely Rick Perry didn't understand the question.
2
Why would the Saudis want to invest in nuclear energy, with all it's inherit risks, when they live in the solar energy capital of the world!?! If they (and Iran for that matter) had any smarts they would be investing in solar R&D with the goal of becoming leaders in that technology of the future, not in nuclear technology that will only serve to annihilate their two countries.
4
Want to Make America Great, Mr Trump? Build the nuclear power plants here. Re-purpose the coal-fired plants in West Virginia. Give nothing nuclear to anyone in the Middle East.
4
"Now lurking behind the transaction is the question of whether a Saudi government that assassinated Mr. Khashoggi and repeatedly changed its story about the murder can be trusted with nuclear fuel and technology."
Gee ... That's a tough one ...
5
The obvious answer is under no circumstances can they be trusted.
5
How can you possibly word the title of this article as if it were even a question, after the brutal murder of American national Jamal Khashoggi??? Trusted?? Please. I remember 9/11 and whodunnit. I don't care if we have to bike everywhere, we don't need their oil and should not need their money enough to turn a blind eye to the truths in our faces.
3
Is there ANYBODY out there who would trust a dictator who lies about committing murder, either individual murders of journalists or the mass murder of civilians?
Oh right, Trump trusts all of those guys - Putin, Kim, and now MBS, because they “vigorously” deny everything. But MBS hasn’t even denied that he would build a bomb to counter Iran. It follows that Trump trusts MBS because he WANTS them to build a bomb. As so many have said, what could go wrong?
4
... Because solar isn’t a viable power solution?
2
Thank goodness World Ambassador Kushner is on the prowl. His leadership is desperately needed right now.
Come on Jared, do it. Make the deal with your friend.
January 2019 is right around the corner. Hurry up.
1
Fabulous, isn't it? The hopelessly autocratic absolute monarchy of Saudi Arabia will have the potential to deliver nuclear warheads to the American homeland the next time the kingdom's most radical elements decide to pay the United States a 'return' visit.....
2
Wefear: The bottom line for the sale of nuclear energy/weapon systems, plans and materials is what the botto
m line financial gain is for tRump and his buddies. tRump does not care about any country's security any more than he thinks about this country's citizens. He is over a "barrel" and will do anything to enrich himself and his ilk before he becomes an ex-president. Granted, since the Saudis will buy nuclear technology from any willing to sell country, it might be in our interest for the U.S. to sell it to them ... maybe there can be a bit of control over the situation ... or maybe not.
Andwewonder: What will happen to oil prices when the Saudis experience a nuclear accident that renders most of the area into radioactive glass and oil cannot be extracted ... or is itself radioactive? Will the U.S. start producing nuclear powered cars?
@Drs. Mandrill, Koko, and Peos Balanitis with Srs. Lele, Mkoo, Wewe and Basha Kutomba, now that’s an original pseudonym. Bravo. Let Westinghouse sell them the house, just not turn over the keys to it.
“Should Trump and his family be trusted to make this decision? “ That is the more appropriate headline.
8
If the US buys into this deal, it is as feckless as the North Koreans and the Pakistani. This is unquestionably the basis of nuclear proliferation. The Saudis have recently demonstrated just how much they respect international norms, such as refraining from assassination of citizens resident abroad in their diplomatic missions. The US might as well give MbS the nukes, which is probably what Trump would prefer if he thought he could get away with it.
No! They cannot be trusted.
Yeah, Iran abides by the JCPOA and Trump punishes it, depriving the country of needed drugs and crucial airline safety equipment.
Saudi Arabia murders an American resident journalist, executes huge numbers of political prisoners and pursues a bombing war for 11 years in Yemen leaving 85000 children starving.
So of course we should give the Saudis a nuclear weapons program because the Iranians are so much worse! Oh. yes. and also because Trump profits from Saudi investments.
What kind of insanity is gripping the Trump White House? Who will stop our mad king Donald!
5
This is very simple. Our natural ally is Iran, the more modern and less theocratic of the two. But anything that Obama did had to be undone. So we are left with the Saudis.
1
Ever hear the one about the Golden Goose? That is what the United States is to Trump. He is too ignorant to see the implications of anything he does. The culture of the Middle East is not one based on trust or good will. You only have to look at their human rights violations and what they did to Khashoggi to see what they are capable of. Also, the major players that instigated 911 were Saudis, not Iranians. If they have nuclear weapons it would be us they would be aiming them at.
2
Well, here it is, isn't it?
The Saudi Arabian government, autocratic, un-democratic and corrupt — not least for heavily peddling and pushing the vile poison of Wahhabism as a kind of "Allah and circus" for the masses — has found its naive American foil in Donald Trump.
Rest assured, if the preening and woefully insecure Trump signs off on a deal to allow the Saudis to develop their own nuclear fuel, the kingdom will soon enough have nuclear weapons.
Perhaps I give the House of Saud too much credit, but it certainly appears that they have craftily lured the mindlessly egotistical American president* into a very dangerous trap.
2
I really hope Bibi opposed this. That might be the only thing that would stop Trump from making this deal. That, or impeachment.
3
Can or should the Saudis be trusted with nuclear power and uranium processing? The answer is obvious. They certainly do not suffer from energy shortages, they are much more aggressive than Iran and North Korea combined and are being led by a maniacal prince who doesn't hesitate to wage war and kill opponents. Though every country has the essential right to produce nuclear energy, the Saudis are a dangerous cult dictatorship and should be prohibited from even being in the position of possessing plutonium.
1
Saudi Arabia cannot be trusted with American nuclear technology. Their reason for wanting it is completely disingenuous...they have enough sun, wind and oil to meet any energy needs they might have, and in fact, have already invested in large solar farms.
Their government is not transparent, and has refused any inspections of nuclear energy, uranium enrichment or other nuclear related facilities should they get the technology from the U.S.
Their allegiances are unclear. They seem to be for and against ISIS at the same time. They practice an extreme form of Islam, akin to ISIS, suppress women's and journalist's freedom, and confiscate foreign worker's passports when they arrive, essentially keeping them as slaves of a sort--in confined, crowded quarters, and overcharging these underpaid workers for their room and board, not letting them leave until their debt is paid off, which is never.
Trump, and Congress, would be true chumps for selling them this technology. Let them get it elsewhere. The U.S. should not br participating in nuclear proliferation.
The E.U., Russia and China still stand firmly behind the Iran nuclear accord, as does Iran itself. Due to Trump's reneging on the deal and applying further sanctions to Iran, the U.S. has been sanctioned by the U.N. international court for human rights violations.
The rest of the Northern Hemisphere is on board with the E.U. and Iran. The U.S. has killed too many in support of its war machine. Enough!
"We have to end nuclear weapons ideally in all parts of the world. That would be a goal for all of us to hope for and to cherish."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/18/watch-trump-and-japanese-prime-minister-shinzo-abes-press-conference.html
Remember that nugget? Our Salesman-In-Chief thought he'd throw in some sentiment in his bid for the Nobel Peace Prize, but that committee also heard:
"When they order military equipment from us, we will get it taken care of and they will get their equipment rapidly. It would be, in some cases, years before orders would take place, because of bureaucracy with Department of Defense, State Department. We are short-circuiting that. It is now going to be a matter of days. If they're our allies, we are going to help them get this very important, great military equipment. And nobody, nobody, makes it like the United States. It's the best in the world, by far."
Is anyone in this nation still missing Trump's message? - What America Values.
Now consider "The Nuclear Posture Review, the first to be conducted since 2010, ...The document reads less like a strategy of how best to deter threats to the United States and its allies and more like a piece of advocacy for nuclear weapons — a self-conscious defense of their utility, affordability, and an effort to expand their mission."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/02/06/trumps-nuclear-policy-is-taking-us-back-to-the-cold-war/?utm_term=.8f3d88a365fa
NO!! We the people know that this cannot ever happen, Trump shouldn't be trusted with the weapons, craziness!
All these people complaining and criticizing Trump on how he has handled the situation with Saudi Arabia have no idea what would happen if relations became bad between the U.S. and Saudi. There is not a country in the world that hasn’t done something seriously wrong. The liberals would criticize Trump if he developed a cure for cancer.
@dave: So what if relations became really bad? The Saudis might close the oil spigot, but that hurts themselves as much as it hurts the US, and the US can produce its own oil and other forms of fuel.
@dave
There is little risk that Trump will cure cancer or make a positive impact on anything, with the obvious exception of his bank accounts, of course.
It would be more interesting to read about what you, an obvious Trump supporter, find beneficial in Trump's secretive dealing in middle east nuclear issues. Do you think that pulling out of the deal with Iran, limiting their enrichment activities, while simultaneously working to supply Saudi Arabia with the same capability actually helps us somehow? Please explain that. We can agree to leave Trump of the discussion table. Just the policy.
2
So easy.
NO.
This is one of the easiest questions to answer in the history of the world, and you can bet donald trump would answer incorrectly.
1
All the deals in the world are not going to get Trump out of the mess he is in with all his shady deals! This is madness!
The Saudis are funders of militant Islamist terrorists, and should not be trusted with nuclear weapons. Don the Con likes the Saudis because they have bribed him.
1
It's not "natural" for us to sell uranium to cold blooded murderers, either. It's a "mean, nasty world out there".
1
Want a war between SA and Iran? Give SA nuke technology. Then again, if it would take SA 10 years to master the technology, we might not have to wait that long.
The Committee to "Liberate" Iran has been salivating over Iran's oil for decades. Now that they've got a shallow and ignorant fool in the WH, they can introduce him to their version of Amhed Chalibi.
"Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?"
No. Do not trust them with nuclear materials. Let them build solar and wind farms for free, clean energy.
If Iran and Saudi Arabia nuke each other the loser will be millions of innocent humans since the guilty perps firing the missiles will be smirking safely in their underground Führerbunkers.
1
Can they be trusted?!?!?!?
UM...no.
3
Oh, heck no. But I'm sure if the price is right, the deal will go through.
2
Why don't we give the Nuclear deal to ISIS instead, I am sure they will be more responsible than Saudis.
2
Can they be trusted?!?! Welcome to Crazytown!! You CANNOT be serious, with that absurd question.
No, they cannot, and no the "nuclear power industry' cannot be trusted. One word: Fukushima. Still contaminating the Pacific Ocean, with no end in sight!
If fusion energy is developed, that MAY be the way to a "nuclear future", but that's the ONLY way. SA can buy anything they want, from any source. They cannot be trusted with anything. Those two facts should be enough to back way from them.
Oh, and their next "king" is a homicidal maniac. What could go wrong?
2
Can we trust the Saudis? LOL Yeah, sure, just ignore that they blew the WTC off the face of the Earth along with the 3000 people that the explosion vaporized and throw in the people who died at the Pentagon and in Schenksville and may as well add in Khasshogi. Other than that -- sure, we can "trust" the evil, vile Saudi regime.
2
The stupidity of this discussion astounds and deeply concerns me. Saudi Arabia wants to develop nuclear energy so that they have the power and tools to create nuclear weapons. WHY would are government leaders and the American People consider trusting a Saudi Leader who orchestrated the brutal murder of a journalist using a bone saw and then repeatedly lied about it? WHY or HOW can we justify enabling the Saudis with the capacity to develop nuclear weapons? The rationalization “ because they will pay us billions of dollars for our expertise and know how” is ludicrous. Have we lost our minds? It is not just the stability of the Middle East that will be greatly endangered by this endeavor. The stability of the entire world will be threatened.
1
Pshaw! Why wouldn't we give nukes to the country that:
1. Bombs civilians and blockades Yemen
2. Built the "Sunni" nuclear bomb in Pakistan
3. From where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from (et tu Bin Laden?)
Look how easy it was to get Iran to stop. Simple, you sign an agreement, get what you want, then withdraw from the "deal."
We're not dumb.
Ha, ha, ha.
Ha, ha, ha.
Ha, ha, ha.
1
Most people may not know but nuclear warfare has only been considered survivable by continental sized adversaries and that was before the concerns about nuclear winter arose. The countries in the Middle East have such small size and flat geography and specialized economies that any could be left incapable of recovering and continuing to function in any normal way for decades after a nuclear attack. They might want them to scare off adversaries but they would likely not survive if they used them.
1
@Casual Observer
Would that include Israel? See area wind map https://www.windfinder.com/#5/25.0000/45.0000
Israel knows that it probably would not survive a nuclear exchange. That’s why they have never used their weapons and would never use them except as a last resort.
It's not just Trump. It's also our amazingly silent Republican congress. We're just past the midterms and we need to keep pushing forward to get every last one of these fall-in-line no-goods out of their seats.
5
Remember that during Trump's inauguration Flynn, sitting there behind him, was texting about bringing Russian nuclear energy to Saudi Arabia.
Replacing the Iran JCPOA with nuclear escalation has always been part of the plan to promote Russian economic interests.
13
No the Saudis cannot be entrusted with nuclear weapons. They have taught hatred worldwide with their ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam. We must not allow the next 9/11 to be carried out with nuclear weapons, by a similar group of attackers.
47
I don't think they have a history of being trustworthy, so they do not deserve this trust. I would like to see Mr. Trump's Taxes and a congressional investigation into the financial arraignments he has with the Saudis. I don't trust Mr. Trump either.
39
Can the country whose citizens brought us 9/11 be trusted? Next question
40
The answer to your question depends on how many condos they buy and how many rooms they book in my hotels...
1
This sounds like a nuclear war waiting to happen. The Saudis have made it clear that they will go head to head with Iran should there be an escalation of nuclear dreams in the region. It is not enough that so many men, women, and children have died due to proxy wars in the region. Now the players are considering raising the ante with the possibility of more deadly weapons in the hands of loose cannons like the Saudis .America has shown that human life - even one - is less important than financial deals and arming despots and dictators. I guess we can count on Trump and America to sell out human life for deals. America's moral leadership is disappearing fast.
24
@Randy Harris
As I am sure you agree, almost anything involving religion is bad news these days. Whether it be the virtually universal scandal of clergy pedophilia in the Catholic Church, female genital mutilation in certain 'traditional' parts of the Old World. And now an announced showdown between Islam's two main branches, Sunni and Shia Islam. But you already know -- Americans are woefully ignorant when it comes to mastering the basics of culture and history. THAT will be America's downfall !!
Please! Please! Stop this idea before it becomes a reality!
11
Trust these crooks and liars? Never unless you're Donald Trump and expect to get a few million dollars in return.
14
@Georges
Monsieur
You know Trump's 'practical' mindset. All of that prime real estate to reconstruct in the American heartland after several US cities have been reduced to radioactive rubble by some of Bin Laden's future fellow travellers.
This is a joke, right? Trump's selling our nation's soul to the devil. Not because the prince is Saudi but because he's evil. How much longer can these ridiculous deals continue? When will conscientious Americans rise up and depose of this wannabe dictator?
Hopefully in 2020.
19
@mytwocents
will get to it after the Superbowl.
It's not likely that the Saudis have the technical abilities to produce a working nuclear weapon. The absence of a work ethic has made it obvious that if they didn't have the assistance of US and other world energy companies, they would not be able to produce their own oil.
The fear that is far more justified is that they will use their wealth to purchase nuclear weapons from others, probably Pakistan. If the Saudis are bold enough to murder and butcher a political opponent, using nuclear weapons against a traditional enemy like Iran is a chance the world cannot take.
8
This culture has a 12th century mentality. The last thing the world needs is for it to have 21st century weapons.
15
Trump in a nutshell: Sowing fear about another 9/11 while giving the country most responsible for it the capacity to make nuclear weapons.
12
No, we do not trust the regressive government of a conservative Muslim country. Not because Islam is not to be trusted, but because oil baron oligarchs are not to be trusted. More than the Israelis the House of Saud has exploited our principle of freedom of religion.
The entire Middle-East Conflict is an exploitation of that principle, we can't militarily squash it because it is a fight between religions - that have their own countries.
Boy wouldn't it be nice if we had a president who wanted to be a peacemaker rather than a gas thrower.
8
"Can the Saudis be trusted?"
In a word, "NO!"
9
Clearly MBS feels that he can do whatever he wants, including killing people. Giving him the bomb would be a huge mistake.
5
Could the Saudis be trusted?
Only if you continue to be hoodwinked by Donald Trump’s rhetoric. After all when a man is preaching lies about his country’s own intelligence agency and their report about a murder involving Saudi individuals, anything is possible.
4
Given Trump’s brilliant remarks about letting Japan and Korea just go ahead and build nukes while we skedaddle, I think I can see where this is headed.
As for trusting the Saudis...are you kidding? One may only imagine Israeli thrillage.
1
Saudi Arabia encouraged a view of Islam that resulted in 9/11.
Saudi Arabia mercilessly hacked a journalist to pieces.
Saudi Arabia has no love for America or democracy.
Saudi Arabia cannot be trusted...with anything.
Period.
11
The Saudi government could not be trusted with the life of a single journalist. How could they be trusted with the power to end the world?
13
Sell nuclear technology to the country behind 9/11? Sounds like a great idea. When America gets done with that, why not travel back in time to the 1930s and sell Germany some more efficient gas chambers?
This administration is an idiocracy.
13
Can they be trusted?
Let me mix rhetorical questions.
Is a bear in the woods Catholic?
4
We should ask Mr Khashoggi if the Saudis can be trusted.
7
Saudis, who have no reservations about murdering their own citizens, want to develop their nuclear capabilities. And an American president, who looks the other way, proclaiming "American businesses first" when describing his world view.
What could possibly go wrong with that picture?
9
Has the U.S been wise in trusting the nuclear armed Pakistan ?
5
Sure you can trust them - to build a bomb as fast as possible.
5
Saudis can be totally trusted to give them nukes to people who will throw it on us. That is a guarantee.
5
Think of the opportunity!
The American contractors who will travel to advise on the construction will need a LUXURY HOTEL to stay in.
10
@Thomas Payne Or an indoor desert golf course. Think of the opportunities!
1
You are trying to accuse them of a huge murder and to them that is like Tuesday! No they should not have the bomb, Jays.
2
A quote from the Quran: Surah 4:75 "Therefore let only those fight for Allah's cause who are ready to renounce the life of This World for the Other World. He who fights for the Cause of Allah, whether he is killed or is victorious, We shall grant him a great reward." The Saudis are willing to die for their "cause" and they are also willing to take the rest of the world with them. So, no, I don't trust them with nuclear power.
5
Obviously not.
3
We’re already dead.
4
The Iranians are smarter than the Saudis. If we give the Saudis nuclear technology, that will guarantee the Iranians see that as an excuse to reengage with nuclear weaponry. The whole idea is so stupid I wonder if it’s not a ploy to lure Iran into a war that Bolton probably relishes.
10
I would not trust them with a butter knife.
7
Well, we know we can trust them not to fly airplanes into huge skyscrapers and kill thousands.
7
Never;ever; never give Saudis Nukes. Are we that crazy? They lie and murder. Trump will sell Saudis Nukes for jobs and money. Never! Ray Sipe
4
@Ray Sipe
We are not crazy.
We have a president , name is Trump. we have no clue what he is?
Emperor “has no clothes” con man Trump is our President. Our Crown Prince Jared is tight with Saudi Crown Prince MBS aka Mister Bone Saw. And Court Jester “Oops” Perry - who once wanted to eliminate 3 Federal Government Agencies including Energy, the department that he could not remember - oops- during a national Republican Presidential candidate debate but now heads, but he did get glasses to make him look smarter - will negotiate terms of selling nuclear power to Saudi Arabia.
What could possibly go wrong?
Don’t worry Trump, Kushner, Perry and their friends will get a lot richer in the deal.
And Saudi Arabia that have us Bin Laden, 15 of 19 9/11 mass murderers, Wahhabism (not Muslim Brotherhood or Shi’a Iran) that is ideological foundation for Al Qaeda and ISIS, that right now is committing war crimes and a humanitarian disaster in Yemen with our help, still has no churches or synagogues, still has gender Apartheid (even if women can finally drive in 2018, with women who led this ridiculously overdue reform in jail), has public beheadings/crucifixations (150 a year, up under MBS) for adultery/homosexuality/apostasy/drug charges/sorcery, routinely jails and beheads dissidents, that chopped up a WaPo journalist, but sells oil (far less influence on oil market now), buys weapons (far less than Trump claims), allies with Netanyahu (but does not recognize Israel and still bans Israelis in Saudi Arabia, used to ban all Jews), will have nuclear weapons.
Art of the Deal, indeed.
8
How many Saudis were guiding the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center
4
re: Chip Steiner
I've been to China more than 40 times since the early 1990s. In the early 2000s I took a trip across its Taklamakan Desert - you know this as the desert surrounded by the Silk Road (route of Marco Polo). I was shocked by how much life there was there; not camels goats (although there were quite a few of these) but by the endless numbers of solar panels and windmills, spreading in all directions as far as the eye could see and appearing for many hours as the high speed (but very smooth and comfortable) train wizzed by. Each time I took that cross desert train there were more and more of them, and not only in the Taklamakan desert but in China's five other deserts. China is successfully using wind and solar power to replace oil and coal, so their air is getting much better than in the past when they depended mostly on coal.
Nuclear power has the distinct possibility of leakage in the case of earthquakes or failure of any of the containers. Solar or wind power can not hurt anyone in case of physical problems. Solar or wind power can't hurt anyone if the physical material breaks down. Nuclear bombs can be (and probably will be) used in the future by deranged leaders to kill millions of men, women and children. We were the first country to use Nuclear (atomic) bombs to kill tens of thousands of people. This will happen again if we don't acknowledge the possibility and outlaw these weapons of mass destruction. And we must do it before its too LATE.
6
Anything remotely resembles that would constitute a 25th
3
Trusted? Are you kidding? We can't even trust Trump. He would sell out America in less than a heartbeat. Then, of course, there are the Saudis to whom "trust" is a hysterical concept.
33
The Devil's Bargain grows ever more complex, does it not America. But worry not, for you have done the right thing in Saudi Arabia and allied with only the right people.
3
Sure - let's give another country in the middle East nukes. It is not like that has been the hotbed of conflict for the last 3000 years. What could it hurt? Plus we know that MSB only inprisions and viciously kills his own country men - i.e. the prison hotel and a mere reporter living abroad.
Oops - forgot about Yemen.
Perhaps our Senators and Congress people, who have shown such backbone standing up to a president (who is ignorant and dismissive of the rule of law), will yet again do the right thing. Sure they will...... This time, only life on the planet is at stake.
Then again, it (nuclear winter) is quicker than slow motion climate change.
11
Trust is not the issue.
The issue is if Israel approves.
If not, their means to do so will be bombed out of existence, like the reactors in Syria and Iraq
Given that Israel is most unlikely to approve - even though it has good relations with SA, see Kashoggi response - the question is irrelvant
2
@Talesofgenji
It is most disturbing that Israel may have that kind of influence in the world. Beware.
The Saudis are every bit as trustworthy as President Trump.
21
Can the Saudis be trusted? Absolutely. Our king said so.
18
Never a good idea to give a theocracy, especially on based on a radical form of a religion, the ability to end the world.
18
How did we get to a place where the guys who got bin Laden are the bad guys and the people who funded him are the good guys?
25
wow. where do you start? the guy suddenly locks up the rest of the family, takes absolute power. meanwhile, he's started a war thats starving thousands. then, murders a prominent journalist. and this is just the things we know from the media.
then, he wants what???? you just worked to stop the iranis, and then you add another unpredictable regime into the mix. and these are the same guys who produced most of the 9/11 guys. wow. to even consider this i think ought to be impeachable or treasonous. what on earth is going on in this administration? oh, and imagine, with the unpredictability of the prince over there, or whatever change might happen there, cause he's certainly made a pot of enemies over there, that somebody turns those guns to face israel? are you sure the saudis are guaranteed to always be friendly for all time??? what if the monarchy is swept away by some social upheaval, cause the current prince sure is creating a lot of trouble that could cause blowback. you simply can't have these guys pall around with such things. i understand their energy needs and need to diversify, that makes sense.
and even a peaceful program, in such an unstable place, you know you're creating a potentially juicy target for a lot of trouble causers there.
remember what happened between iraq and iran when saddam had chemical weapons. they could turn these onto the iranis. this i think is unthinkable, only a gambler and reckless US president would even contemplate this madness.
11
Wow. Can we trust the Saudis? Sure, to indiscriminately slaughter children in Yemen, murder journalists, attack NYC, etc. etc. and then lie about all of it.
So many wins now. North Korea laughing up their sleeves as their nuclear program rolls merrily along and now we will allow another nuclear power in the already unstable middle east in a country ruled by a lying murderer. And expect Iran to idly stand by.
What could possibly go wrong?
12
I'm simply astonished at the utter fools that we have running this Administration. The Saudis don't need nuclear electricity; reactors are a justification for refining uranium for bombs. Nothing else. Moreover, it is inconceivable that Trump and Kushner don't know. Moreover, if these simpleton New York real estate thugs couldn't decide that on their own, they have advisers who could fill them in.
Big nations bent over backwards to devise a treaty arrangement with Iran to eliminate their bomb program. Iran will restart their program if the Saudis can build reactors.
What does Trump want? Another multi-Trillion dollar war in the Middle East? That war would include the Israelis, who will go to no end, political or military, to stop nuclear programs in adjacent countries.
6
Why is there even a question about this issue? NO NO NO Surely anyone in their right mind would vote against giving the Saudis nuclear capability.
6
The question should be can we trust Trump? Temp only cares about the Trump empire and will try to destroy or discredit anything else in the way.
3
Can they be trusted?
No.
But remember, money is speech.
13
Can they be trusted?
No.
4
Can Saudi Arabia be trusted? NO, ABSOLUTELY NO!
We should abandon the House of Saud immediately and let the sand blow where it may.
8
Nothing good would come from allowing Saudi Arabia nuclear weapons capability. They do not need a nuclear reactor to produce electricity. They are perpetrating genocide in Yemen with American Weapons. If they had the "Bomb" Iran would have to restart their nuclear weapons program.
4
Here's another scary factor - Since Saudi Arabia is a relatively lightly populated country, they would be bringing in a lot of outside experts to build either (and) the nuclear power plant or the atomic weapons program. Who and where would those people be coming from? US expatriates? Pakistan? Russia? N. Korea?
You tell us.
It makes sense Iran could muster a program - they have 81+ million fairly-to-highly educated people in their country. Saudi Arabia has worked hard to keep their rank and file ignorant, that's why they cranked out virtually all of the 9-11 hijackers.
Of course SA wants it to be a weapons program. If they, Iran and a few other countries achieve that it is only a matter of time before they get used in acts of war or terrorism.
6
No, they cannot be trusted in anything.
5
I believe Saudi Arabia is located in a desert. That's a fair amount of sunlight, and it's my understanding solar energy runs on sun. Do you think maybe ... nah, that's just crazy.
2
What could possibly go wrong?
6
Westinghouse is NOT an American company. It was sold by Toshiba to a Canadian group.
https://www.ft.com/content/74afda84-f174-11e7-b220-857e26d1aca4
1
@RealityCheck
That si one of our educational problem , Many Americans assumes once American corporations are still American.
hello capitalism
Most likely those same Americans still thinks Jaguar and Land Rover British car companies.
Having read Michael Lewis' comments on Rick Perry running the energy department, seeing in this piece that Congress has oversight and knowing that, if need be, Donald Trump will get involved, I have to ask, What can go wrong?
3
No, of course they cannot be trusted.
6
Instead of working to disarm Iran, we will arm the Saudis. The only way to stop a bad guy with a nuclear bomb is a good guy with a nuclear bomb. Is the NRA writing our foreign policy?
It's part of Trump's international protection racket. Sow fear. Reap money/political support by selling American weapons.
10
This is ominous. And in his profound ignorance and self-serving agenda, I fear the worst with Trump at the helm. What is ironic is his wrath against the Iran Nuclear Deal which is wisdom personified compared to this present folly. And make no mistake Saudi Arabia is far, far more ruthless than Iran...and wealthier. What sends shivers up my spine, also, is Rick Perry. He is a fool and no match when compared to the brilliance of Obama's Secretary of Energy. How are you feeling now, Bibi? Can you play the puppeteer with Saudi Arabia as you did with Trump's America?
3
Oh, OF COURSE they can be trusted. To make weapons.
3
Please no. They are so uncivilized, so cavalier about killing, so inhuman in Yemen. I would trust Iran more. Why court disaster?
2
Trumps response to Saudi’s statement that the crown prince was not involved in Kashoggi’s murder is the exaxt same reaction Trump gave to Putin’s involvement in the poisoning of a Russian man and his daughter in England as wel as the poisoning of a policeman and his wife.
He also ordered the use of force by American soldiers. This President has gone to war with his own citizens in favor of hardcore dictatorships,
He has suggested to return to Turkey a religious leader who has lived peacefully in the US holding a greencard to please a Dictator in Turkey, one of the first people Trump called after he won the presidency with Russia’s help.
And this list of dealing with dictators is longer and gets longer every week.
The biggest most dangerous extremist still lives in our WhiteHouse!
Trump is not a Patriot, he doesn’t care about real people everything he does relates to him
2
To answer the question posed in the headline: No.
3
Trust the torture murderer of Kashoggi? Further, people who lie compulsively like Trump are either locked up in jail or inmental institutions. Lock him up.
2
the saudis already have a deal to get nukes from Pakistan if necessary, so this would be redundant.
In fact, a retired Pakistani Army Chief is heading the Arabic force in Saudi Arabia. Saudis recently approved billions of $ in loan/grant to Pakistan, after Pak Prime Minister visited MBS.
The aspect of Saudi Arabia wanting, and then getting a nuclear bomb, isn't as frightening as the very real possibility that this president would actually give it to them -- especially when he still refuses to acknowledge Mohammad bin Salman's personal responsibility in the horrific torture and death of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
2
Donald T, our beloved leader, effectively promised before the election that he will eliminate US debt. This is his best opportunity to fulfill his promise, hoping that Saudis are willing to pay at least $500 Billion per nuclear Bomb. They can have many Bombs, and we can get all their wealth in return. Just don't offer any expertise to secure these!
Israel or Iran can then take over, and Saudi Kings will be back to their original way of living, before oil was discovered.
Oh, certainly! Let's provide nuclear know-how to a liar who murders when a journalist irritates him. Might we boost our economy a bit with Saudi purchases of nuclear necessary materials?
4
Can we trust any Arabs when there is a struggle for dominance in the ME? Knowing Trump, he will take their cash first and think later.
2
Just what the world needs, ANOTHER religious, fundamentalist country with nuclear weapons. Humans are by far their own worst enemy.
7
The Saudis are supporting people who bomb us now in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, so we are foolish to continue supporting them.
1
Well, we trust John Bolton, Trump, Huckabee Sanders, the new grifter A.G., Ivanka, Jared, Kellyanne, Fox Morning News and
every other dictator in the world.
Why not the Saudi Prince - he's as unreliable and as crazy as all the rest.
2
You would think that solar would be a much better source of energy for a desert nation.
127
@Kathleen Kourian
Well said--
2
@Kathleen Kourian
Congratulations for the perfect answer! But I see no reason to make any deal with the Saudis. Are the Republicans, currently in control, going to permit Trump to make even a suggestion of such idiocy? Unbelievable.
6
@Kathleen Kourian yes. And wind. But you can't make bombs out of it.
7
The short answer is NO.
Today, the Saudi's may not want to build nukes but they clearly want the technology and the fissile material that will enable them to build one should Iran resume its efforts to build the Bomb.
The infantile Trump administration, led by the President and John Bolton, doesn't want to understand this because it would interfere with a business transaction, touted by Trump.
If Israel had a government, its Prime Minister would try to dissuade its new found (temporary?) security partner, Saudi Arabia, from going this route.
1
Trumps immaturity and the blatant stupidity of his high level aides on all sides is scary.
The Saudi’s have all the oil and gas they want, plus cloudless skies, to remain energy independent fir a hundred years. Conventional technologies allow them to distill seawater too.
The only reason they have to want and use a reactor is to enrich fuel for a nuclear bomb. They could go to the Chinese for it too. Trump probably thinks the lying killing dictators in that country can be trusted because they look good and powerful on tv.
A mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv or Teheran ends civilization as we know it.
60
@The 1%
Really no thoughts here, misspellings and all.
Gotta keep this secret technology away from the Saudis. Because they might give it to the Pakistanis, who could give it to the Chinese. Right?
What?! Pakistan's had it since the Zia era? It's barely a state and it has hundreds of nukes? It's been renting the weapons out for years? Oh, I thought Faisal (as in Faisalabad) was a traditional Pakistani given name...
This paper is either pretending to keep the gullible distracted, or... worse, true amateur-hour reporting.
It's a hue and cry about a non-event, the liberal flip to the army of day laborers marching through Chiapas to take Texas.
Gotta love people putting this mess on the Ever-Bad One, Trump.
1
@Weiss Man
Your re-focus on the sweaty, brown skinned hoard of mostly women and children walking across Mexico to attempt to join the great American dream, and on the severity of the existential threat they pose to us, especially compared to nuclear weapons in the hands of brutal dictators harboring no empathy for the masses they kill and starve in their never ending quest for power (not a comment about Trump but it does kind of fit), is truly inspirational. You guys can make Trump lemonade our of anything.
6
Tom Lehrer wrote three songs about the bomb which are horribly relevant today. Even though this is *only* about nuclear power, it makes it too easy. It's a bit out of date, but that is informative about history.
Please also consider what happened when we helped the UK unseat democratically elected Mossadegh to help BP (of gulf oil spill infamy). How quickly we forget that "those to whom evil is done, do evil in return" (Auden): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FgMTAj4f_o
First we got the bomb, and that was good
'Cause we love peace and motherhood
Then Russia got the bomb, but that's okay
'Cause the balance of power's maintained that way
Who's next
France got the bomb, but don't you grieve
'Cause they're on our side, I believe
China got the bomb, but have no fears
They can't wipe us out for at least five years
Who's next
Then Indonesia claimed that they
Were gonna get one any day
South Africa wants two, that's right
One for the black and one for the white
Who's next
Egypt's gonna get one too
Just to use on you know who
So Israel's getting tense
Wants one in self defense
"The Lord's our shepherd," says the psalm
But just in case, we better get a bomb
Who's next
Luxembourg is next to go
And, who knows, maybe Monaco
We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb
Who's next
5
We know we can't trust them, but is it realistic to think that we can we stop them? We couldn't stop North Korea. Israel already has nuclear weapons. It's only a matter of time till Saudi Arabia and Iran have them too.
The question is, how can we work globally and intelligently through diplomacy to defuse conflicts that may result in the vaporization of the Middle East?
3
Past experience tells me if you're rich, a royal and not all that bad looking - you can't be trusted.
7
To see what will happen look to the Canadian example: we provided CANDU nuclear reactors to our peaceful friend India in the 70’s with their promise to use the tech for peaceful power generation.
India is now a substantial nuclear power...
13
LOL, declaring that Saudi Arabia can never be trusted with nuclear weapons technology is quite different from actually depriving it of that technology. Short of military intervention the US has even less ability to stop the cash rich Saudis from acquiring and/or developing nuclear weapons than it does the Iranians. Given that reality it seems wiser to position ourselves as overseers of that technology development rather than imposing sanctions or indulge in moralizing to a country whose culture has scant appreciation of and even less use for morals.
2
@tim k" A la guerre comme a la guerre," which has less to do with actually waging war, but rather is about recognizing the reality that EVERY NATION with the means to do so, will create a nuclear arsenal, seeks entry into the nuclear club soon or later. Trump admin. recognizes this, but nonetheless its efforts to seek a rapprochement with North Korea are commendable!"The more contact that we can have with the North Koreans, the better, which is why I respect Sec. Pompeo's diplomacy and that of the president's Never understood the animus by the mainly white, liberal establishment against The Donald!The more effective he is in terms of his economic policies, anti open border stance, ability to articulate the desires of his millions of constitutents, and witness his rallies of `10,000 and counting. He is a magnetic political figure, and thanks to him cable news networks like MSNBC where 1 of the main hosts, Joe Scarborough and his attractive spouse, despite being given, according to "oui dires, " the heave ho from Mar a Lago, benefits rating wise when the main subject is Trump. "Sui generis" is the term I would choose to describe Trump, and same words were used to describe, by the way, THE KINGFISHER, Huey P. LONG whose family has done so much good for state of Louisiana.LOL is a term usually employed by teen agers, no se ofenda,.
Saudi Arabia has been our ally. It is more important than ever that we need them in both way: helping Israel in order to stabilizing the middle east and stopping expanding of Iran. It's also is big business for America. If America doesn't do it with them, then Russia or China will take over the Saudi Arabia.
@ted Meanwhile Canada is still a national security threat to the US. Go figure.
2
Whatever, Jared
2
@ted So let’s apply your logic, as follows: See that bank on the corner? Someone is going to rob it eventually. If I don’t do it, my neighbor Joe, or Sam, will. So it might as well be me. Anything wrong with that “logic”?
6
The Middle East is now in 2018 a cesspool of corruption, religions of all sorts pretending to be the answer to populist problems resulting from endemic, generational rule by the one percent and mostly as a result of America’s attempt at regime change throughout the region for seventy plus years, regime change to benefit big oil, the ruling Saudis and of course Israel. The M.E. was at one time an exotic mix of fascinating civilizations that welcomed travelers from round the world; from Casablanca, to Tangier, to Lebanon whose major city was referred to as the Paris of the Middle East, the tour of Egypt once considered essential to the fledgling world traveler. Syria, Turkey and Iran whose four thousand year old countries gave us so much in the way of science and math. We have made a mess of the area and providing arguably the worst of the players in the M.E. with the ability to make a nuclear bomb is absolute insanity but one that will probably come to pass as the unholy alliance between America, The Saudis and Israel marches blithely forward to either total domination or oblivion of the M.E. and possibly much more. The best thing we can do is walk away from these centuries old conflicts and hope they can resolve them among themselves, we do no one any good by attempting to play God. Having said that as long as we have Kushner and his ilk in the mix purporting to dictate foreign policy we are in for a rough ride that hopefully won’t bring America to the brink saving Israel.
6
@Ted Wow. Let’s blame all of this world’s garbage on Israel. As a reminder: Israel is only 70 years old, but the Sunni-Shia conflict is more than a thousand years old, and the Arab-Persian conflict is even older. But let’s blame Israel and the Jews, because they are convenient scapegoats.
@Northwoods Cynic: I’m a Jew and like it or not those are the facts. You apparently missed my sentence relevant to the Sunni/Shia as well as numerous other incantations of the same, that said “the best thing we can do is walk away from these century old conflicts and hope they can resolve them among themselves, we do no one any good playing a God.” This article is about the situation today and it is indisputable that our actions to promote the interests of Big Oil, The Royal Saudis( another way of saying big oil)and yes Israel, who lately has disappointed so many Jews both in America as well as in Israel and the rest of the world, their actions as well as the actions of many high profile Wall Street Types have, you are correct, once again put us in the cross hairs of bigots and strong men populists, if we don’t call to task those miscreants among us you can bet the rest of the world will and the decades we spent helping to build the new nation of Israel from the earliest days of raising money in our local synagogues for “Trees for Israel”(that I participated in as a child in the early fifties)will be for nought. We can’t allow a few bad actors to destroy us all. One of the smartest men around, Ron Pearlman, saw it coming and said a decade ago “ we should start giving more for charity”. The Palestinian issue, Netanyahu, Kushner, that’s not who we are.
1
Weak know-nothing Tump will cave to anything they want. He’s willing to lie about murder when it suits him.
Is he planning Trump Tower Riyadh, or is this just more evidence of Trump’s ignorance, admiration for authoritarians, and vacillation on key decisions?
4
The words "Saudi Arabia" and "trust" are mutually exclusive.
Never in the history of this kingdom have they demonstrated anything that would lead a rational person to conclude they can be trusted to maintain an agreement.
That written, we must recognize that the words "Trump" and "trust" are also mutually exclusive.
Hopefully the more intelligent and less greedy in our government will halt this project.
4
Seriously? The Saudi rulers just ordered the torture, murder, and dismemberment of a Saudi citizen with American permanent resident status - by a hit team smuggled into and hidden inside the Saudi Embassy in Turkey! The case is still not resolved - Not My President says the Saudi Royal family says they had nothing to do with the murder. 'NMP' says he will maintain his (very personal) relationship with the Saudi royal family...He will continue "doing business with them because they buy a lot from us..." The CIA has released their finding that the royal family ordered the killing. 'NMP' says "the CIA has not reached a conclusion" - he has repeated these words all week - same words, over and over. You cannot make this up! "Can the Saudis be trusted? - Can Trump be trusted?" Of course not.
7
From Iraq to Syria to ISIS to Yemen the U.S. has been mired in an endless sectarian war in the Middle East. By withdrawing from the Iran Nuclear Accord and aligning U.S. policy in the region with a young, impetuous, reckless, and ruthless Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (aka MBS), Donald Trump has set the stage for a major region confrontation between the Saudis and Iran. To allow the Saudis under MBS access to producing nuclear weapons is the very height of folly. The last thing the world needs is a nuclear arms race in the Middle East already inflames in a Muslim civil war with the drumbeats of war with Iran already beating in the Trump administration, Jerusalem, and Riyadh. This is truly an Armageddon scenario of Biblical proportions.
4
The Shah of Iran was once our "friend." He bought weapons of all types from us - and the Soviet Union, then our sworn enemy, and France, Great Britain, Germany, and anyone else who possessed even the most rudimentary capability to make a plane, boat, or cap gun. We built reactors for him to help advance Iran above the rest of the Middle East.
Then the Shah was deposed by religious zealots who now control all of that and terrorize the Middle East - and the rest of the world.
Saudi Arabia is no different except it is already run by religious zealots. When they are Strong enough, they will not hesitate the attempt to destroy Iran, their sworn religious enemy, and the rest of the Middle East. They've already just about leveled Yemen without nucs. How much more effective they would be with just a few nucs.
Trump's administration is once again demonstrating its uncontrolled greed and myopic, shortsighted view of the world and history.
5
This would be a different discussion if the USA had honored its treaty obligations with Iran. Then we wouldn’t need to give any credence to the idea that Saudi Arabia needs nuclear weapons. In fact, non-proliferation was one of the main arguments in favor of the Iran nuclear accord. But now the same people in Trump’s administration who worked to scuttle the Iran nuclear accord are in position to cite their own actions as a reason to allow Saudi Arabia to develop a nuclear capability in the broad sense. And Trump himself has already conflated his refusal to hold MBS to account with his hatred of Iran. So does anybody really think that he will take seriously the threat of nuclear proliferation to the Saudis? Or even that he regards it as a threat instead of a desirable outcome? So if there’s money to be made selling reactor technology to them, I think we can count on Trump to be all in.
6
It's simple and not about trust or nuanced foreign policies: 80 Billion. It will be approved. An interesting follow up article would be to investigate the prodigious lobbying efforts by Westinghouse.
1
But Westinghouse is not an American Company!!
Was the abandonment of the Iran nuclear deal just cover to give the Saudi's nuclear capability? How has the Trump family benefited from their "personal" dealings with MbS? Will members of the Trump administration flee SA to avoid prosecution after the graft is exposed?
2
Trust the Saudis? Yes, to build a bomb.
Trust Trump? Yes, to give the Saudis what they want that is within his power, as long as he can get something for himself.
Trust the Republican Leadership? Yes, as long as they can use Trump to implement their domestic agenda.
Trust the Future of the World? Not so much.
4
NO! Saudi Arabia is an autocratic self-serving nation where money is a deity.
1
Rick "Oops" Perry couldn't remember 1/3 of the three federal agencies that he would have eliminated had he become president.
His formal education culminated in a bachelor's degree in animal husbandry.
That he is negotiating a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia is one of the most dangerously absurd aspects of Trump's dangerously absurd mis-management of the executive branch of the United States of America.
This must be stopped by act of congress, invocation of the 25th amendment or impeachment. We can't afford to wait until 2020 when the worst case nuclear proliferation is at stake.
4
@Steve M Plus, lets not forget his memorable time on "Dancing with the Stars." Just thinking about Perry in any job with responsibility beyond asking, "Do you want fries with that," is frightening.
1
It's hot and sunny in Saudi Arabia. With all that solar energy raining down on them, what's the need for nuclear?
With a population of only 32 million, a few solar panels should meet their needs just fine (and they have plenty of desert land on which to place them).
And, I doubt that solar panels can be used for terrorist activities -- except by right wing nuts that are climate change nay-sayers (in legislative, government cabinets, big oil & coal board rooms, and their media supporters).
Iran is one of the most democratic nations in the Middle East. They have regularly scheduled competitive elections between different political parties. Historically Iranians loved America. In comparison Saudi Arabia is a totalitarian absolute monarchy where women have no rights and half the population are denied citizenship. Maybe we need to examine the motivation of our leaders from both political parties to better understand their positions.
1
No. Knowing Saudi's they will blow themselves up. But seriously, if they were truly seeking at Energy alternatives they would have looked a solar - in country that has one of the largest deserts in the world and over 300 days of scorching sun Solar is a no brainier. The only downside is that you can't blow things up with solar panels and they don't fit on top of their Chinese made missiles. I can't believe that this idea is even on the table. Look what they did with a bone saw.
5
Wonderful idea: If the prince were not the leader of one of the richest countries in the world, we would be calling him as a coldblooded sociopathic murderer. After all, he ordered the assassination of the Washington Post columnist. We would long since have forced regime change in his country. After all, almost all of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. If the president did not expect to take in billions from the Saudis, now and later, would his White House, under the guidance of nuclear arms expert Mr. Perry, be holding these secret negotiations? Giving the Saudis the ability to make their own atomic weapons sounds like a wonderful plan.
3
The fact that this is being entertained at all makes me absolutely indignant. The Saudi regime is one of the most draconian, capricious, and punitive in all the world. Do not think for one split second that they would hesitate to use a nuclear warhead if they had one.
2
So, Rick Perry is overseeing a Westinghouse deal to outsource production of 2 nuclear reactors for sale to a murderous dictatorship that wants to participate in a middle east nuclear arms race. What could possibly go wrong?
Solar powered desalinization could make the desert bloom, and the evaporative cooling of this restoration could do something to offset global warming.
Someone who could bring water and food to that parched and hungry world would rightly be addressed as Caliph.
Answering the title's question is like shooting fish in a barrel: Of course not.
Imagine you are hosting a birthday party with 2 dozen 10-12 year olds. They all arrive on January 20th, 2017 and they will not go home! They destroy the furniture, they upset the neighbors in almost every way imaginable, they blast out 150 decibel discordant music in short tweets, they fight with their longtime friends, they invite the wrong sort to crash the party. You just want this nightmare to end--it has been going on for 21 months and there is no clear end in sight.
Now, apparently, someone told Rick Perry his department manages the nukes and he thinks it would be nice to give that technology to the Saudi’s as a party favor. Clearly, this rave is going to end with a bang!
2
@Woody Rick "Oops" Perry was so accomplished in animal husbandry that he did the American thing and moved up, using Texas to springboard. Onward and upward to head-scratching excellence doing Donald J. Trump’s dirt-work. Trump finds marks unerringly. Trump in his fashion warned about his hiring. No need to blame Perry for Trump’s misleading. Blame Perry for taking home pay under false pretenses. We have no solutions. Shovels enlarge holes. No one in government is contemplating reasonable solutions. The administration cannot say where the negotiations stand because the administration does not know. One cannot say, incredible. It is in our face.
It's not for energy, obviously. Saudi Arabia can harvest solar energy in short order to supply all it's electrical demand. Why on Earth would we ever trust these people?
1
Sure, let's just ignite the entire Middle East. I mean, why not? The crazy eschatologists waiting for the second coming would be on it like ants on sugar.
Let's see, super fast delivery times due to short distances, more fingers on triggers, and cultures that have 10's of centuries of enmity. What's not to like?
(I'm going to New Zealand or Tasmania as soon as possible, and going to become a nutty prepper because, well it is about as sane as allowing nuclear arms to the Saudis.)
On the plus side, I understand that a limited nuclear war will mitigate climate change for a decade or so. (Might I also suggest it is time to rewatch "Dr. Strangelove", and listen to Tom Lehrer's "Who's next?" song about who is going to get the bomb next.)
No annihilation without representation - ok?
1
The next big money making deal for trump to make America First? How much will he & kushner get to make the deal happen?
This is the same country that gave us 9/11. The Saudis would not hesitate to use nuclear power to make fuel & weapons to use against Iran, Israel, Yemen, & any country they seeas opposing them. Including those rogue agents who would attack the US.
Can not someone stop the madness of the man who would be godking from dealing with the Saudis? These are the Muslims he should be afraid of, there are still bin Ladens & al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. They do not love America.
1
I hate to crush the naivety of Americans but we are the largest arms dealer in the world, with Saudi Arabia our top client at 18 percent. We have more than 2,000 nuclear weapons. We spend more on our war budget than any other country. And we rank 17th in the world in quality of life. And less than 50 percent of us vote. And when we do vote we elect people like Trump and Rick Perry. If you don't like the state of the world, just look in the mirror.
4
A bunch of Saudis helped blow up our World Trade Center buildings with aircraft. Now we are considering a deal that could enable them to create fuel for nuclear bombs?
Can we even call this president and his cronies "American"?
1
Apparently all we want out of Saudi Arabia is the oil. Maybe we can cut a deal with Iran, Saudi Arabia for oil, and a promise to leave Israel alone, at least for a thousand years. Hear that Donald? Put your “skills” and “charms” to good use.
Just kidding. Trump needs the money and the Saudis are the only ones who’ll give him any. Besides, has he ever actually pulled off a real deal that didn’t bankrupt someone or destroy an economy (Atlantic City)?
1
Wow. With the brutal genocidal war in Yemen and the sociopathic behavior of a very young Prince who will rule for generations...this could signal to be one of the greatest mistakes in history for the survival of humanity. This Prince and regime cannot be trusted to be decent. They answer to no one.
It’s a disaster that could be easily avoided by the US.
There are bigger things than money and arms deals or false loyalty at stake here.
1
So many comments parrot the same mantra over and over: 9/11 and Khashoggi.
Red herrings.
As for 9/11, the U.S. has plenty of homegrown terrorists. They don’t represent our country, and they’re out of the government’s control.
Why all the screaming about Khashoggi? Does anyone think the CIA hasn’t knocked off plenty of perceived enemies?
As for the Saudis, the entire game is to one-up the Iranians. I don’t know if either of them can be trusted.
The Israelis will never use a nuclear weapon unless they’re really at the end of their existence. It’s purely a way to tell their enemies not to push them to the end.
The problem is that the Arab states can change governments and philosophies very quickly. Iran used to be our ally (and Israel’s too!). If the Islamic fundamentalists overthrow the Saudis, they would then have nukes.
Not a good scenario.
2
No way can we trust this Prince. I trust our CIA who have told us what he ordered done to the Journalist. It is my hope that the International Community thru the UN will sanction Saudi Arabia for what was done to Kashoghi
In one unequivocal word, with emphasis NO.
Despite what the President thinks about Saudi Arabia as an ally, they kill and torture dissidents, are killing innocents and creating mayhem in Yemen, did little to account for their citizens who participated in 9/11, have actively tried to end the state of Israel, while simultaneously doing nothing for the Palestinians, who they see as merely pawns. Could we provide this know how and participante? Sure. Should we? No way. Their record stands for itself and answers the headline with searing clarity.
Letsee..unlimited supply of oil, unlimited supply of sunshine, tons of desert space, and they want a nuclear power plant which are known money losers? Gee, I wonder why? The only thing we could trust them to do is start a nuclear war with IRan. ANd Trump would look the other way, as long as they bought more planes and continued staying at his hotels.
Bush/Cheney and Trump/Pence=Republicans who facilitate the Saudis. What could go wrong?
“But if I don’t sell heroin to my neighbor’s kid, then someone else might!” That’s the level of argument we’re dealing with here, folks.
1
Stay clear of this country in thought, word and deed.
There are countless example of us supporting brutal, amoral dictator type countries in our history.
All of them ended in disaster.
1
Ohmygosh, trust the Saudis? Never in a million years. Or for a trillion dollars. Where's Israel in this equation? Is fear of Iran blinding them to this folly? I am always astonished at how low Trump can go. Just when you think you have hit rock bottom, he finds a way to make everything worse.
Are we really this naive? I would be willing to bet that Trump is being paid somehow to give the Saudis nuclear weapon technology, if not nuclear weapons. They are setting themselves up for the coming nuclear holy war against Iran. Rationality does not apply when there is money to be made. Trump is old. He will be dead and gone by the time the rest of us have to pay the piper for what he's doing as president.
“Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?” A rhetorical question? They can be trusted — to build one! Trump’s OK with that.
1
Saudi Arabia with nuclear weapons? What could go wrong?
“Asked in Congress last March about his secret negotiations with the Saudis,” this line just simply so laughable
It has been 73 years since an atomic bomb was detonated in anger. This means that very few still alive in this world can actively recall the intense devastation from just two very small atomic bombs.
Who can be trusted with The Bomb? No one, not even us. As I try to point out in my unpublished novel "Fallout: remains of an atomic war," the U.S. under both Presidents Truman and Eisenhower were prepared to use atomic bombs in either limited or all-out war. In 1957 we were poised to do so with atomic bombs carried on low-flying fighters. Perhaps as many as 200 in an instantaneous, preemptive strike.
We've managed to stave off atomic war since 1945 by cobbling together treaties and threats.
To give the demonstrably evil Saudis the means to possess The Bomb will surely mean the end of the shaky, tattered peace that exists. Maybe the end of us all.
40
No, we cannot trust the Saudi's not to build a bomb. Talk about giving dynamite to a toddler! MBS has already shown us that he cannot be trusted when he had Khashoggi killed. We don't need a low price in oil badly enough to share the nuclear secrets with him. He may well buy them elsewhere, but let us not give a brutal dictator even more deadly weapons right after he has once again betrayed such brutality to a journalist who was living in the US and working for the Washington Post, a highly rated American newspaper. This was the act of a man without principles. We should cut back on the weapons we sell the Saudis. until they can be trusted with guns and knives.
17
The US enabled nuclear weapon in the Saudi armour when viewed with its desire to be the arbiter of the Arab world is a sure recipe for disaster specially considering its intense competition with Iran its main sectarian rval engaged in the similar power play to rule the already rurbulent West Asia.
7
Contemplate how different this country would be viewed, and how different the world be, if the US historically made foreign policy decisions based on the premise, "If we don't sell it to them, someone else will."
7
There may be no greater evidence of a providential presence in our world than the fact that a Cold War waged over forty years never went hot. The Soviet Union and the United States understood that their respective interests in promoting their own and restraining each other's political-economic systems could not come at the price of global annihilation.
The more nations that get keys to their own nuclear arsenals, the less the world can depend on those nations' internal restraints to keep the world safe. And at the risk of sounding like an Old Testament Prophet, the last thing this world needs at this moment is a nuclear power whose existential mission gives no reason to believe anything it says regarding the sanctity of lives other than their own.
7
@GuiG
Instead, they fought endless proxy wars in client states killing millions. Providence indeed.
No. Saudi Arabia is a fundamentalist Muslim nation whose real desire is to counter Iran. They may very well be able to purchase their nuclear equipment from Russia, France or China. Trust them: never. Sell them nuclear capability? Probably.
9
No one wants Iran to have nuclear weapons but there is a question of whether the Saudis can be trusted with one? Many of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. None came from Iran.
64
@Dave in Seattle
Actually, of the nineteen highjackers, 15 were from Saudi Arabia.
Yet we picked a fight with Iraq in which there were no Iraqi nationalists. Not even one.
Then we let/helped the binLaden family secretly fly out of the United States in the dead of the night.
Right now, it not that I don't trust the Saudi's, it's that I don't trust our own country's leadership, especially with this president attitude of selling out to the highest bidder, as long as there are dollars in it for him personally.
And believe me, with Trump, there would be dollars in it for him.
2
15 of 19 hijackers were Saudi. All with close ties to Saudi and the ruling families.
Clear funding from people tied to the top echelon of Saudi government.
Trust them?
Really...
But in the end money talks, just as our president.
24
Asking the wrong question.
The correct question is why do the Saudi's want a atomic bomb.
The answer is easy.
Because Iran might have one.
Saudi Arabia needs a way to deter Iran from sending Nukes there.
They can't depend upon a third party to do that.
They therefore need Nuclear weapons.
I have a idea.
Tell Iran if they do not stop their research on ICBM's we will give Saudi Arabia the bomb.
If you want to blame anyone for the predicament we have blame Obama and the terrible deal he made with Iran.
We should have listened to Netanyahu
2
@lucky You're joking, right? Trump pulling out of that agreement is what precipitated this.
@lucky
What was the “terrible deal?” Iran agreed to stop developing the bomb. How is that worse than giving the Saudis a bomb? We have an immoral president working with an immoral — murderous — Saudi leader.
God save us all.
@lucky Or in other word, my playground toy needs to be bigger than yours. The road to Armageddon. Great.
The only logical reason why Saudi Arabia would like a nuclear power plant is because they also want nuclear weapons. Their demand of producing the fuel themselves just makes it more obvious. Few countries have better prerequisites for solar and wind power. So the question should be simplified to "Should USA enable Saudi Arabia as a nation with nuclear weapons".
As we have seen, for years, Saudi Arabia is no stranger to use force against their enemies. The USA have helped Saudi Arabia to become a powerhouse for many many years by both arming them and disarming their enemies.
Can Trump, or the next US President, control Saudi Arabia? How much control does Saudi Arabia have of the USA?
19
@Stefan
You say they are no stranger to use force against their enemies.
That is true about Iran Syria and Iraq.
It is not true about Saudi Arabia until now and it is only true now is because Iran has funded groups in Yemen that if they win there will be a threat to Saudi Arabia.
@lucky
Yes, everything is Irans fault :)
Looking a bit deeper you'll see USA and Russia fighting a war by proxies.
Thanks to the NYT for revealing this horrendous attempt by Trump to give nuclear technology and the ability to make weapons grade uranium to the Saudis. The CIA concluded based on evidence that MbS approved the premeditated murder of Khashoggi, he has waged a war in Yemen that has killed and starved thousands, and he said his goal is to develop nuclear weapons to counter other Middle Eastern countries. How can we seriously consider giving the Saudis nuclear technology?
Since Trump has proven that he will kowtow to the Saudis no matter what they do, it is up to Congress to block any such nuclear deal with the Saudis. Hopefully the House will hold public hearings on this attempt to nuclear weaponize MbS.
37
That's all we need: three nuclear powers in the Middle East (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel). The Union of Concerned Scientists has calculated that just a "limited nuclear war" (10 warheads at today's increased yields) could throw up enough dust to cause nuclear winter. And then there's the cessation of a large amount of the world's oil supply and nuclear terrorism (Iran, Saudi Arabia).
Pulling out of the Iran nuclear agreement was bad enough. Let's not make it twice as bad.
19
The stable genius in chief will have a sit down with the Prince where he will be assured strongly that the Saudis will not produce a bomb. Now, they might produce a bomb or they might not produce a bomb. No one knows for sure. We'll just have to wait and see.
30
@RNS
Should have about the same success rate as Trump's N. Korean anti -nuclear agreement.
1
Such events bode very poorly for the future of a safe and stable world.
Because our government has become corrupt and unprotective of basic human rights and world order, we have the situation that few nations are able to act as the "world's police." In the past we, using leadership by example, set standards for ethical behavior.
Now, with few nations able to do this, the world is slowly devolving into the worst whims of madmen like trump, putin, kim jong-un, orban, duterte, bolsonaro, et al...
We will have world stability and progress only if our government or several European governments fill this anti-corruption and ethics vacuum.
In that regard our nation, through ignoble trump, now assuages MbS' worse impulses. MbS is now considered a corrupt murderer. Major worldwide intelligence agencies having examined evidence of his involvement in the Khashoggi dismemberment recognize his culpability. MbS as de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, will increase its corruption.
Saudi Arabia and Iran have been in a religious war across the Mid-East for centuries. This will not stop.
It is foolish to sell Saudi Arabia any technology allowing their developing nuclear weapons. This will further destabilize the region, and will hasten the spread of nuclear weapons into other dictatorial and weakly-ruled nations.
The trump administration is full of unqualified staff lacking an understanding of the situation, and interested mostly in self-gain.
Disastrous! The complicit GOP must stop trump!
16
@IN Thank you for sharing your insightful observations. Selling Saudi Arabia nuclear technology will not just result in foolishness... the results will inevitably be catastrophic. It is NOT just the complicit GOP that must stop Trump... it is every American Citizen and our allies all over the world. The wellbeing of the planet and the survival of coming generations depend on more than our words. We must all step to the plate and stop the insanity that is radiating from the White House.
2
Saudi Arabians were the majority of the 9/11 hijackers. Saudi support and promotion of Wahabism has spread hatred and extremism throughout the Middle East. This latest extremist leader, MBS, ordered the murder and dismemberment of a Washington Post journalist who criticized the Saudi State. MBS apparently ordered that the murder take place inside a Saudi Embassy. The he lied about it.
We are foolish to continue to have a close relationship with the Saudis who have never had our values or welfare at heart. Given the Saudi Arabian involvement in killing civilians in the war in Yemen, we should not be selling weapons to the Saudis.
Enabling the Saudis to move toward having nuclear weapons is insane.
And Trump's policies and values have thus far been the definition of insanity.
The Saudis flatter Trump so we can assume Trump will give them whatever they want. Capitulation to the wants of the Saudis is one more example on the global stage where Trump is willing to put millions of lives at risk.
20
@fast/furiousThe Saudis can not be trusted. If they have nukes they will use them too.
Aircraft on direct flights from Saudi Arabia, while circling Western cities have nuclear weapons detonated in their holds.
It is past time to ban direct flights to the US from non secure regions
7
I don’t know how the question in the headline could possibly be answered otherwise than “no, the Saudis absolutely cannot be trusted”.
14
@G.O.
Agreed but to deny they have a good reason to want the bomb is just being ignorant.
They only reason they want one is because Obama made a bad deal with Iran.
If that deal can be improved then Saudi Arabia will not want one.
Yes we can not Trust Saudi Arabia.
We can not Trust Iran as well.
It is time that liberals like you accept that and back Trump in his attempt to get a better deal.
It's shocking how brazenly corrupt and dangerous the Trump administration has become.
The clock on impeachment may have already run out. Patriots in his cabinet should invoke the 25th amendment immediately.
9
Sure, let's help a nation intensely hostile to many of its neighbors develop atomic energy, and look the other way while it produces its own nuclear fuel - a nation that gave us Al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, and the 9/11 bombers. What could possibly go wrong?
19
I might have come out in favor if this deal 5 years ago, but recent events show that the Saudi government isn't capable of the logistical capabilities that management of nuclear reactors (and fuel production/safeguarding) require. For instance, look at the fiasco of the Khashoggi killing (where we are either required to believe that MBS has scores of reckless lieutenants unable to peaceably detain an unarmed late-middle age man, or was so ill-prepared that they hadn't even bothered to produce a good cover story if plans hit a snag). Or their continued inability to hit military targets reliably in their literal backyard, Yemen, even with US intelligence. Or an economic blockade so ill-conceived that it results in the worst famine the world has seen in generations.
No, this is not a government that has shown it is mature and capable enough to reliably harness the atom. The last thing we need is another Chernobyl in Riyadh, or a "lost" shipment of enriched uranium diverted to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem by a hot-headed, insubordinate lieutenant.
6
Nostalgia quiz:
How many of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia?
How much money and support have the Saudis give to al Qaeda?
Why would the US provide nuclear technology to terrorists?
12
Are you kidding me? They can't be trusted. It doesn't make sense to go nuclear, they have huge solar potential.
11
Trump’s insistence that jobs, oil and the strategic relationship between Riyadh and Washington are all far more important than the death of a Saudi dissident who was living, and writing newspaper columns, in the United States.
Perspective really is everything and it’s nice to finally see it put into print. Prior this I was made to feel as if Mr. Kashoggi represented Opie Taylor or Beaver Cleaver, the All American Boy who America’s honor depended on defending at all cost.
@John Doe -- You are right with this. Thanks to Trump the mention of honor and America in the same sentence should only be done in sarcasm.
@Michael, but how could I forget to mention Jack Armstrong? Shame on me.
Who were the geniuses in the US government who thought this was a good idea? Is this an idea whose genesis was in the last administration, or the current one? What on earth do our Israeli allies think of the Saudis having the wherewithal to develop nuclear weapons? Does the Saudi handling of the Kashoggi atrocity think that it indicates that the kingdom can be trusted as any kind of nuclear power? The only response I can think of being appropriate is a big old 'Whoah there!' This should not happen.
7
The nation that brought us 9/11 should NOT have a nuclear capability. Have we forgotten?
11
Can they be trusted? Of course not. Can Trump be trusted? Of course not.
14
Strange - the USA hasn’t built a nuclear energy plant in maybe 15-20 years...we used to have expertise but like everything else China, Japan, etc now possess the skill and know how and our so called President is fiddling while Rome burns.
3
The US still has a significant design knowledge and capability that has been used around the world.
@Andrew: Nuclear power plants are not safe. California is in the process of closing San Onofre, the last operating nuclear power plant in the state. We have learned that the cost, in dollars and environmental risk, outweigh the benefits. Solar and wind power are safer and cheaper.
I am 72 y/o. I’m unlikely to reach 80. I look around m3 for reasons to be grateful for that. Sometimes I sort of wish I were gone already. This sort of overwhelming insanity turns me into s coward, and makes me thankful that I’m not leaving progeny to try to figure out how to live in the modern world.
I certainly didn’t feel totally safe when Barack was President; now I feel pretty much totally unsafe. The language I use when I speak in private to my dogs would disallow my comment, so let me answer the headline’s question with a simple ‘No’. The reader is left to imagine the modifiers I might otherwise apply.
14
Your dogs would make better ‘senior advisers’ to the President.
1
The answer to the question poised at the start is simple.
No.
4
No we do not have a need to help Saudi. What we do have is a threat from Saudi. The Saudi always threatens us with going to Russia or China, I say let them. We do not need them or they're oil. Do you not remember the oil embargo of the 70's, that was our pals the Saudi. They are not our friends, allies at best, sometimes. In short they are by any means trust worthy, they are to be held closely because that is what you do with potential enemies.
This article brings to mind what other secrete deals are going down. I think we will be hearing a lot more now that the Dems. are in control of the house. I also now that whoever is the house majority leader, my just be president before 2020. One can only hope!!!
3
First, a not-unrelated reminder: 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 hailed from Saudi Arabia. What are the odds that the Saud family was totally oblivious to any plans of assault on the US?
Second, a second question: Do Saudi government officials lie, frequently, often and without interruption? Please keep your answer brief.
Third, never forget: It's all about Trump. Trump is keeping an eye out for his financial well-being should the day come when he is no longer in the White House. He is more than willing to hand over the keys to the nuclear candy store, along with the passcode to disarm the alarm system. Trump sees keeping a tight friendship with MbS now as his key to a lucrative future in the sands of the Middle East, so lucrative he might actually attain the level of wealth he claims to hold right now.
For the moment, Trump is substituting power for wealth, but when the ring that rules them all is taken from him, then it is wealth he will need to feel fulfilled. By holding close to the Saud family, he is betting they will help him out in his time of need. Pity. Such a needy man.
9
Well, Trump obviously trusts them, so...
It is painful to hear your president openly admit that money is everything.
8
Here we see the clearest example of the danger of a Donald Trump administration. His inability to see beyond simple consequences is complimented and enhanced by his appointment of grotesquely unqualified cabinet members. Now we have arguably the least qualified of these --- Rick Perry --- negotiating a nuclear transaction with the country that produced Osama Bin Laden and the majority of the 9/11 attackers. A country whose open support of madrassas teaching Wahhabism continues to actively produce fundamentalist terrorists. A country that murders its opposition in broad daylight, on foreign soil, with a nod of approval from our president.
And the question is, will they weaponize this nuclear technology if we give it to them? The question should be: Is there anyone who believes they will not?
13
“Rick Perry currently serves as the 14th United States Secretary of Energy. He leads an agency tasked with maintaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear deterrent and reducing the threat of nuclear proliferation, overseeing the United States’ energy supply, carrying out the environmental clean-up from the Cold War nuclear mission, and managing the 17 National Laboratories, home to the country’s best scientists and engineers.” - from Sec Energy website.
Rick Perry did not know that the Secretary of Energy is the caretaker of some of the USA’s nuclear assets.... The Saudis just told a stream of transparent lies to cover up a brutal assasination of a reporter.... what kind of negotiation that enables Saudi Arabia to close in on nuclear weapons can possibly benefit the United States?
Is anybody home in Washington?
11
The US has been "limiting" nuclear technology for the past three-quarters of a century, with several unintended - but reverse-catastrophic - consequences...
> US fission reactor technology has not appreciably advanced - while construction costs have skyrocketed because of the custom approach to plant design, and inherent safety systems have not been developed
> Because we so deeply co-mingled commercial and military nuclear technology, we may have made the worst fuel-sourcing choices to start (breeders for plutonium, and fuel cycles with U-233 in the loop) - and have never quite recovered
> Have no firm idea of who actually developed the air-bearing centrifuges that made U-238/235 fuel-enrichment so possible...But - like medical marijuana - appears the only thing stopping everyone from making some were US prohibitions
With all of this, the Chinese and Russians now appear to lead substantially in quantity and quality of nuclear fuel and power plants...
The cruel irony - the "Westinghouse" reactor business was acquired by Toshiba, nearly bankrupted them - and was sold to a Canadian company...
The cruel reality - the news about the nuclear industry and its outlook becomes less and less credible, as folks who owe us better are instead trying to paper over this situation with propaganda...
The only ones I trust here are the Russians and Chinese - to leverage this situation to their strategic advantage...
1
"Privately, administration officials argue that if the United States does not sell the nuclear equipment to Saudi Arabia someone else will — maybe Russia, China or South Korea."
Imagine if this were Iran rather than Saudi Arabia. Trump would never accept that kind of reasoning! He would threaten publicly any nation that dared cross him. But with Saudi Arabia, he just doesn't have the will.
7
As the article points out the proposed Saudi agreement seems identical in terms of time frame to the Iranian Nuclear agreement which the Trump administration has withdrawn from.
In short, if you offer Trump money, you can build the infrastructure needed to manufacture your own nuclear weapons. If you don't have sufficient money to offer, like Iran, the Trump administration will vow to destroy you.
A consistent approach is clearly in order. Either enrichment facilities are allowed with suitable monitoring or they are forbidden. The answer should depend on principle not on ability to pay or to bribe.
Unfortunately, as the approach to the murder of Kashoggi illustrates, the Trump administration is completely unprincipled. With Perry leading the negotiations, we are ignorant as well.
8
So, the US-based development, marketing, and distribution of alternative energy sources beyond fossil fuels is not a strategic initiative? Man those Republicans are shallow and obviously have not served in a strategy-centric environment (read military).
We developed or are (or were) researching technologies that are not radiologically proliferating and reduce liquid/hard carbon's role in our energy distribution. If we did it right (a hard swallow for Republicans), then Saudi oil would be $10/bbl. This is where we need to be to disempower these knuckleheads.
5
In answer to the title of this article: No, they cannot be trusted. The Saudis may be our allies, but they are not our friends. They recognize Trump as an easily-manipulated buffoon, and they will take advantage of that.
I still remember the Oil Embargo of 1973-1974. Gas prices zoomed from $0.29 a gallon to over $1.00 a gallon literally overnight. The American economy went crazy. People were panic-buying gas. Long lines and shortages were everywhere. (I know, because I worked at my grandfather's gas station.) The OPEC nations (which included Saudi Arabia) had us by the throat, and they weren't about to let go.
Today, we are paying around $3.00 a gallon for gas--something that would have been unimaginable in the 1970's. If we give the Saudis nuclear material, they WILL build a bomb, and they WILL threaten us with it. Not overtly, of course, since that is not the Saudi way. But they will show us that they can't be pushed around. A nuclear war-head means a seat at the table where the serious players determine the fate of the world. Why wouldn't the Saudis want that?
6
No.
The extreme militant Wahhabi Islam MBS and lots of his cleric friends have intentions far outside of American interests.
Trusting the Saudi government with a can opener would not be advised.
10
Nuclear energy is antiquated, expensive, and dirty. What do you do with the waste? On the other hand, Saudi Arabia has an abundance of solar energy. If the kingdom wants to shift from oil, then why would they choose nuclear over solar? Clearly, they have other plans, and we should NOT trust them to refrain from weaponizing nuclear technology.
The United States should welcome Saudi Arabia with open arms and embark on a joint program to bring solar energy into the mainstream. There is no reason whatsoever to help them add more nuclear waste to our already swollen repositories.
14
Just another example of severely flawed foreign policies. Problem is, it's been going on for decades, with the rest of the world paying for it in every possible way.
2
A full investigation of ties between the 9/11 hijackers and the Saudi ruling family is long overdue. The United States cannot slide down on a slope as slippery as Saudi oil with its historic price gouging and exploitation of foreign workers .
4
Trump, the mercantilist is obsessed with trade balance - exports must come before imports.
His administration has spent “considerable time” advising Saudi Arabia and other Arab states on acquiring nuclear reactors. Michael Flynn was briefly involved, seeking to take Russia on board to supply them with reactors.
Although the Saudis deny any ambition to build nukes, they can’t be trusted with nuclear knowhow for what they call civilian purposes.
The Shia/Sunni sectarian divide and the hegemonic struggle between Riyadh and Tehran have got out of control. Given hostility towards Iran in Israel, the region is highly unstable.
The war in Yemen shows how blindly the Saudis rely on military means to solve problems. Once possessing nukes, there’s a risk that Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman would see them as a sword to cut a Gordian Knot.
Jamal Khashoggi's killing shows that the impetuous MBS is cruel and reckless.
But Trump is even worse. At a comfortable distance he is playing an arsonist, setting the Middle East on fire. He tore up the nuclear deal with Iran, sowed discord between Qataris and the Saudis, while selling arms to rogue actors.
Short-sighted he can’t see the forest for the tree, thinking the region is too far away and a potential nuclear war there wouldn’t affect the US.
In 2016 Obama urged the Saudis to seek some kind of accommodation with Iran that would help defuse tensions. His advice fell on deaf ears, and his relationship with them was very tense.
7
For this administration it's all about the monetizing, knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. At Trump's next rally, maybe some brave soul can sneak into the PA system and play as his entrance song that Motown classic (their first) covered by nearly every band and singer on the planet: Money (That's What I Want).
5
The fact that MBS would raise this issue suggests that Trump is now all but bankrupt and looking to monetize the presidency.
19
@Jack Whether or not Trump is financially bankrupt will not be known until the NYT, WSJ or Washington Post gains access to his financial records. We do know now that he is morally bankrupt. But so are the millions who still support his presidency.
3
In weighing the plusses and minuses of a nuclear plant deal with the Saudis, it is obvious from this article that the plusses would be tiny. Westinghouse would license its plans and the manufacture and installation of the plants would be handed over to some foreign concerns, such as the South Koreans. Hardly the hundreds and thousands of jobs that this president likes to crow about.
Of course, nuclear power would cut the Saudis CO2 emissions. BUT if they retain the right to produce their own fuel, this archaic regime will have the capacity to make nuclear bombs, ready for a final, glorious battle of Sunni v Shia. What could go wrong, right?
3
@Alan Mass Saudi Arabia has the wind and solar energy right now to supply the entire country all the kilowatts it needs. They do not need nuclear weapon- producing power plants to supply their domestic electricity needs.
2
Wonder what Netanyahu has to say about a nuclearized Saudi Arabia? Sure KSA is "friendly" with Israel now, but it won't be forever. The two countries have common enemies now but Israel is foolish if they think KSA won't turn their attention to them one day.
7
@In Pursuit
It's a certainty. Saudi more of a danger to Israel in the long run.
3
I forget. Did 'senior adviser' Jared Kushner ever get his full security clearance back?
19
Should Saudi Arabia be trusted? NO.
Can the U.S. stop them? NO.
9
@Jean No the Saudi's cannot be trusted with nuclear technology. Once they have it, they will simply buy a bomb and this administration will say nothing to stop them.
2
Well now it all makes sense, the Saudis have bought our President and they want Donald to get them a Bomb, the big one, legal and out in the open. 15 or so the 9/11 highjackers were Saudis. The Kingdom put up banners to commemorate their fallen heroes who died attacking America. But the Saudis buy a lot of stuff from our President and he loves them. They will get their deal. Sad, this is as clear of a case were the emoluments clause should be used as I have ever seen.
24
@GladF7 I agree the Saudi's will get their bomb from us. This administration - Kushner and Trump - have a vested interest in keeping them happy. Follow the money!
2
@GladF7 The Saudis buy apartments from Trump; he will give them what they want. We have the most corrupt president in the history of America sitting in the Oval Office making decisions that affect his own wallet and still have no idea what his personal business dealings might be. This is how we "Make America Great Again"!
1
In all fairness many Presidents before Trump have coddled the Saudis, giving them what they want. They were behind the 9/11 attacks and Saudis paid for the terrorists flying lessons. They should have been sanctioned then.
1
I read an articles like this one, consider the potential evil it presents, and have to wonder if the destruction of the human species by the ravages of climate change is such a bad idea.
Are humans too stupid to live?
Looking at the "leadership" in countries around the world, the men (and it's chiefly men) with the power to make life better or worse, one has to wonder.
Listening to the BBC news, I hear of millions of people murdered, bombed, maimed, starved, enslaved, forced to leave their homes because or war or corruption, etc. etc. etc.
Why? Why is the impulse to kill, hurt and impoverish so pervasive around the world?
There is so much goodness, kindness and compassion as well, but persons with those characteristics hardly ever seem to rise to the kind of power that the bad ones achieve. And all too often even good people collude with the evil ones or vote them into power.
The Dalai Lama says human beings are in essence good. I'd like to believe him, but some days it is virtually impossible to do so.
24
Isn't the question also whether the U.S. can be trusted to hold up its end of a bargain? Any deal made by the U.S. is now meaningless, as shown by Trump's willingness to renege on deals made by a prior administration.
13
There are no circumstances under which permitting Saudi Arabia to develop a nuclear infrastructure is in the United States national interest. What a ghastly concept.
20
I think the question is: do we sell nuclear technology to the architects of 911 and a despot who just had a dissenter murdered and dismembered? The answer is no.
39
The Saudis bought close to US 4 billion in 2017, most of it from the US , the rest mostly from the UK, Germany and France. The last three have cut back and will not be sending arms to Saudi Arabia because they have the Christian morals that the presumably un- Christian Trump doesn’t have. Supporters of Trump outrageously claim the US is working for the force of good to undermine Iran with Saudi Arabia’s help. But of course it’s all about preserving little Jared’s reputation. The scenario is to get a Middle East peace agreement with the Saudi help, plus domestic files Little Jared is working on, and Jared will get huge exposure at the re-election rallies and TV interviews in 2020, so when Trump rehires to his golf courses for good, Jared, like Medeyev, will run for. president and take over the family businesss so the Trump clan can continue to personally benefit from deals they make and money received solely because they are in the White House and can dispense favours to oil and coal batons and murderous regimes like the Russians and Saudis. Such is the morality of the United States of America.
7
The Saudis have us enmeshed in their long running feud with Iran currently resulting in a terrible and vast humanitarian crisis in Yemen. Imagine what they will do with nuclear weapons.
15
@OC With nuclear weapons, they will destroy us and anyone who deem is not worthy of existing.
2
Rick Perry is unqualified for his position and in way over his head, much like his boss. Having him negotiate anything is ludicrous when he has little capacity for understanding what exactly this deal would mean , both long and short termed, other than a monetary gain for a US corporation. And that seems to be the deciding factor in all of this administration's decisions. If the bottom line is big enough then this administration disregards any consequences. And those will be numerous if this deal comes to frustration.
One also must look at the optics since Trump' s son-in-law and advisor, Jared Kushner has financial dealings of his own with the Saudis. That alone should be enough of a red flag to sideline this deal. Any other administration would have thought about this aspect. But not this one.
257
@Rit Who knows what Jared's been flapping his gums about with the Saudis? He of little to no security clearance. Probably lots of dollar signs floating around.
14
@Rit: love the spell check switcheroo in phrase "If this deal comes to frustration".
It would certainly lead to frustration if it came to fruition, but let's hope the Democratic house has some say in that.
The prospect of Rick Perry forced to answer questions by an energy committee hearing, would make for delicious live TV.
8
@Rit
Steven Perry is better qualified . . .
3
Reading this article makes me very cynical about the future of the world. We know that nations who do not claim nuclear weapons indeed have them. Now, as a nation, we are flirting with a country who purports only nuclear energy but has said that it will weaponize in certain conditions. I am old enough to realize that I will probably not see what I do envision...the destruction of the world in a nuclear holocaust engendered by petty disputes between egotists, narcissists and the evil.
264
@vincentgaglione And Saudi Arabia after spending 100 billion dollars in weapons could not finish the war in tiny Yemen leading to a catastrophic famine. And now it seems it seems they are begging other countries to send troops to help. Imagine the same forces with nuclear weapons? They probably will drop it on feuding princes who could not agree on who would get the biggest yacht.
15
@vincentgaglione: When you write “petty disputes between egotists, narcissists and the evil.“ I can’t help but thinking of Trump fighting himself.
8
@vincentgaglione
Rather than add a new comment, I'm seconding what you said.
5
From a retired Nuclear Industry manager, two words. “Absolutely not”. From the land and culture that produced Osama bin Laden, 9/11, and murdered an American Resident in a Turkish Consulate, there is no more reason for the US to gift upon them mastery of the nuclear fuel cycle. A commercial power plant, maybe. But then again, why on earth do they need a nuclear power plant when Saudi Arabia is the text book example of a,country that is perfect for vast solar investment. A Nuclear Power plant could only be a pretext for future military uses for nuclear technology.
I am sure the current sophisticated administration and its deep analytical decision making capability understands this hazard deeply and not be tempted by the prospect of making a couple of bucks.
455
@Mark wyo
"I am sure the current sophisticated administration and its deep analytical decision making capability understands this hazard deeply and not be tempted by the prospect of making a couple of bucks."
If this is a tongue in cheek comment (sarcasm), then I would agree. If not, then based on everything else that this clown circus has done to make a fast buck for themselves, makes you think that they are not salivating over this prospect.
12
@Mark wyo--good sarcasm, last paragraph. And they are investing in solar for Arabia. The thing is, the technology's not perfected for storing and transporting solar energy, which they want to do. They've still got oil. No reason to go nuclear, unless menace and mayhem is their goal.
18
@Lilou - Whether its a nuclear power plant, or a giant array of solar cells in the desert, one still needs the same infrastructure, namely power lines and system protection, to get the power transported. And instead of the huge capital cost needed for a nuclear power station, I am confident Mr Musk would provide state of the art batteries for night time power storage.
8
I am probably a dreamer but I wait for the day that the words John Lennon sang in Imagine come true.
6
Why even ponder the question? Of course they are trustworthy, ethical, people of high regard. They showed us that since, let’s see when was Mr. Khashoggi unavoidably murdered? And then we have our own gem of a leader who doesn’t condemn this atrocity for what it is but for the poor way in which it was carried out. Yes, I say let’s believe all these people with, what was that again NUCLEAR POWER. No restrictions. Does Trump not care what kind of world he is leaving his family? Evidently, not.
6
Only a crazyman would make a deal to give the Saudi's nuclear power. Of course they will build nukes, they cannot be trusted even a little. The have an ocean of oil and no need for nuclear power. If the Saudis have nukes so too will the Turks, Egyptians, Iraquis and the rest of the Middle East. Some might say it will counter Iran but when the nukes start falling you can bet some will hit Israel. Unfortunately there is a crazyman making deals.
9
I usually get up in the morning and read the Times. I had this eerie sense I was still asleep and dreaming when I read this. We need to cut off all trade with Saudi Arabia. I would say Nuclear isn't even in the discussion, but like another time when I was sure I was dreaming, I remember who the president is.
10
Considering their track record with airplanes, the Saudis don’t need anything more deadly than that, they seem to be doing fine.
18
I'd rather see them and others go nuclear energy and keep fossils in the ground. No CO2 emissions with nuclear energy production of electrons. We should do the same here in USA. No pipelines traversing our land's with nuclear. one delivery of rods lasts years. No fracking required.
1
@jazzme2
If both Israel and Saudi Arabia have nuclear weapons, our concerns about climate change and environmental damage due to fossil fuel extraction become irrelevant.
4
@jazzme2
"I'd rather see them and others go nuclear energy and keep fossils in the ground."
If this really was about an alternative energy, the desert kingdom would go solar.
This is about giving nuclear bombs to the nation that birthed the terrorists that took down the towers, paid to spread a terrorist interpretation of religion through the world, and murdered and dismembered a mildly critical journalist.
No
6
@jazzme2
Have you considered the disposal/storage of nuclear waste?
We seem to have forgotten about Fukushima.
What about Hanford? Contamination is ongoing.
3
Allowing Saudi to develop nuclear weapons. Totally insane. Our very survival would be imperiled. Remember 9/11 anyone. That was a Saudi attack. I guess with their money they could buy from N. Korea or Pakistan.
I still feel we should have a lessening of tensions with Iran leading to normal relation and an eventual alliance to limit Sunni Saudi dominance of the region. Russia, Iran, China Canada and US could drive down oil prices in order to destabilize Saudi. They are a treacherous lot giving birth to Al Qaeda and ISIS and spreading their Wahhabi theology world wide. Saudi must be contained. Giving them the opportunity to develop nuclear weapons is madness.
21
Here is a better idea: let’s honor the Iran Deal and open it up to a full scale business relationship with Iran and abandon our relationship with the actual terrorists, which is Saudi Arabia and the radical wahabbist philosophy that it has fueled with countless dollars spent on indoctrination madrassas around the world.
42
Trust the Saudis? A kingdom operating on a barbaric medieval ethos? The House of Saud is built on sand. When the world is no longer dependent on oil, it will collapse like any sand castle. The Saudis, in their death throes, will lash out with nuclear weapons. Fifteen of the nineteen fanatics who gave us 9/11 were Saudis. Perceived enemies are brutally murdered and dismembered. Trust them? No, no, and no.
28
The potential of a Cold War and a Hot War may leave America feeling sandwiched in. In any event our current president has too much on his plate at the moment, but it is a matter to be considered when we have our next commander-in-chief in place.
2
The Saudis are not our friends. They pretend to be, but finance our enemies. They should not be trusted with nuclear weapons, especially in view of the damage they have done with money and conventional weapons.
21
I can hear Donald Trump saying "80 billion dollars! If we don't sell them this stuff there are lots of people who will and that money will go to them".
7
We should clear our heads .Saudis were a large part of the group who attacked us .We should not let them produce their own fuel and there needs to be inspectors.If they go to China or Russia to become nuclear we should destroy there oil production or block it because they are in reality our enemy .A friend of Trump but our enemy. Any one who remembers 911 should never forget and hold our pols to account.
7
Why would a country their size need 16 nuclear power plants? Iran-Saudi rift is similar to India-Pakistan rift. It is likely that both Iran and Saudis are eventually going to have a nuclear bomb, regardless of what position or action the US may take. They are not trustworthy. We need to operate under the assumption that they want to build the bomb. Are we going to help them with that? Are we going to allow others to help them with that? What is going to be the ultimate consequence? India and Pakistan ended up building their arsenals without annihilating each other in the end. Maybe, while they can't be trusted to answer truthfully to outsiders, Iran and Saudis can be trusted to be intelligent enough not to annihilate each other too?
4
It is appalling that the United States would even consider this at this point in time.
15
I am old enough to remember September 11th in real time - and well remember that the crux of the plot originated in SA. The people who committed the attack on the US were avowed haters of our country, our way of life and us as human beings.
While the Saudis have painted gloss on their beliefs to blend in better with the rest of the world, that hatred - for our country, our way of life and us as human beings - surely still exists - just waiting to strike again.
Now tell me - why should SA ever be given weapons or nuclear material...by anyone, let alone by us?
14
What surprises me, I guess, is that Saudi Arabia even brings this up. The nation has essentially an infinite amount of money. They can buy what they need, from fissile materials to scientists with the knowledge to make nuclear weapons. A call to Mr. Kim in North Korea would get thing started.
7
Interviewer”what are you afraid trump will do ?”
Truth Readout “that he will use a nuclear bomb”
Interview shortly after he was elected
If the Saudis get a nuclear bomb they will use it . Keep atomic weapons out of the hands of dictators
7
I'm not Henry Kissinger, but I am going to go on a limb here and say that this might be a bad idea.
29
Trump insists that Putin and MBS are more reliable sources than all of American and NATO sources. Can Trump be trusted?
The CIA has a tape of MBS ordering Khashoggi’s torture, dismemberment, and murder according to Haaretz, but Trump claims that the CIA doesn’t have conclusive evidence.
Any American who says that we can believe Trump regarding anything substantive at all. Can Trump be trusted? He claims things are going well in North Korea after he got a “great deal” with Rocketman? Not according to the headline: “In North Korea, Missile Bases Suggest a Great Deception”
When the President does not understand basic scientific facts and has suggested that Nuclear weapons are useless if we don’t use them is he a trustworthy negotiator? Would Trump sell nuclear plans to Saudi Arabia?
MBS and Putin and Kim are evil men by any measure. Praising and emulating these men are what Trump does and wants to do. At some point Americans must ask is the President trustworthy? Does he adhere to his oath? "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Or is he ignorant of his duties, the Constitution, and in fact undermine the Constitution in favor of self interest, and/or support the goals of those who hate government by the people.
8
Trump is trying to become "the man who sold the world", rather successfully it appears. Congressional intervention is a possibility, but that fortitude and foresight beyond the immediate their treasure capture seems unlikely. A more direct possibility may be a massive boycott and divestiture of all things "Westinghouse". The nuclear powerplant would be the last income by them since they are not content with limiting their greed to the stable side of the spreadsheet.
4
So Russia or China will do it if we don't? Is that sufficient reason for the US to do something so foolhardy and just patently wrong? Maybe we can't shape the world to our liking at every turn, but we can at least not actively participate in knowingly making it worse and more dangerous.
12
Upon first reading, I thought this was a headline best suited for "The Onion."
Whatever strategic value Saudi Arabia has in the Middle East, the leaders of that country have a poor record of integrity and accountability. Just the insistence of making "no inspections" a pre-condition of any nuclear agreement speaks volumes.
15
Can the US be trusted with the 6600 nuclear warheads that it holds? Currently we use them to bully the rest of the world with the implicit threat that we could use our planes, missiles or submarines to deliver them anywhere on the planet in less than thirty minutes. It’s way past time to talk about taking these weapons out of the hands of the only country that has ever used nuclear weapons on other human beings, the largely civilian targets of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
3
The question is not whether they can be trusted. We all know they are as trustworthy as an abusive parent. It is whether we can afford to refuse them the know-how.
3
No, they cannot be trusted. They ought to be investing in solar power.
7
No. Absolute worst case, to keep China from just handing SA a reactor with no oversight, the US should build a reactor and keep it under US control.
There is no guarantee that the Saudi government won't become another failed state like Syria and Libya. Then anybody will be able to just drive off with the metal.
I hope someone can talk SA out of this.
4
The Sauds would be better off getting nuclear plant from anywhere else other than America.
Trump and his fellow conmen cant be trusted in any sort of deal.
They welch on deals, treaties and their own citizens.
They dont understand anything but short term gain.
There is no honour, truth or justice in Trump.
The idea he understands the subtleties of international anything is farcical.
As a result America has no true allies any more so why deal with a rogue nation.
Best cut them out of the equation and have a good laugh when they demand support from all the organisations Trump has slated. Nato etc etc etc.
I am more scared of the hawks in America and the base base that sit at his knee.
Forget Saudi. As an isolationist parochial America First should you simply focus on your own swamp.
Remember to vote now to vote him out 2020.
7
By their actions in Yemen and disregard of human rights, the Saudis have proven they cannot be trusted with weapons of mass destruction whether nuclear or otherwise. To give them such weapons would be to move closer to the precipice. When will rational thought prevail?
6
Why should anyone have to fear that the Saudis will build a nuclear bomb? Why not subject any Saudi nuclear program to U.N. monitoring - like in Iran? I guess I just answered my own question.
3
Who doesn't trust young saw bones? Maybe I do, maybe I don't. We may never know. We are approaching Kafka inspired times.
3
You say that Saudi Arabia has been interested in obtaining nuclear weapons to protect it from "potential threats from its neighbors - first Israel, then Iraq and Iran." When has Israel ever threatened Saudi Arabia, other than by its mere existence?
1
“‘Whatever the Iranians build, we will also build,’ Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former Saudi intelligence chief, warned...”
Four thousand years of civilization? Good luck with that.
It might be worth keeping in mind that, as far as we know for sure, only the United States has ever actually used these weapons on a target. Those two targets were civilian centers, and it all took place over the course of about 96 hours.
And we still haven’t had the decency to issue an apology to Japan.
3
there is always missing information and, possibly in this case, hidden informtion. was this information being purposely hidden by the U.S.? seems highly possible, if you think about it. who has the most to gain? who has gotten millions of dollars from the Saudi's?
3
The answer is "No, they cannot be trusted." But, that will not deter Trump and is government from striking a deal because the Saudis have money. So, if they accidentally or on purpose, happen to kill a larger number of people, the people with the current mentality will simply say "Maybe they did, maybe they didn't, who knows, we will never know." The Saudi's defense is also already in place "they vehemently deny doing anything like that." Denial is the new strong defense.
A country that supposedly has so much oil to use it against America as a weapon in current negotiations should not need nuclear power. It will be interesting to see if Rick (Ooops) Perry will have the gut to tell this to the Saudis. Even if he remembers what to say!
3
Of course they cannot be trusted. If any country should be pursuing solar based energy, it is a desert like this place.
8
Ask yourselves if Saudi's would be using tactical nuclear weapons in Yemen if available?
Whose hands will nuclear weapons fall into after the regime falls?
Will they likely be even more extreme than Wahabi's?
Will they turn to North Korea or Pakistan for the technology?
2
Trump sees dollar or riyal signs. He is so corrupt, he will support the Saudi’s. There is no safe use of nuclear weapons. Nuclearization of the Middle East is a bad idea. Radioactive oil is unusable. Trump must be stopped. And Iran is not worse than Saudi Arabia. They are both unstable and dangerous.
4
If your teenager wrecks his Camry through careless driving, would you buy him the Corvette he wants as a replacement?
7
NO! Have you already forgotten 19 of the 20 murderers from 911 came from Saudi Arabia. Look what they are doing in Yemen these days. Their human rights record is horrible. Yet you are considering giving them the access to building a nuclear bomb? Has the whole world gone totally insane?
9
“Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?” No, Saudi Arabia cannot be trusted.
The power and wealth of the Saudi monarchy is based wholly on oil. It is absurd to believe that the monarchy going to undercut its own source of strength. Yes, the Saudi economy needs to be diversified for the good of the country (and arguably for the good of the Saudi monarchy), but the assertion that a large-scale nuclear program is the best route to economic diversification falls apart under even cursory scrutiny.
Developing a nuclear power infrastructure is enormously complex, expensive, time-consuming and politically fraught. By comparison, developing solar-based energy is far less difficult, and in a sun-drenched desert nation like Saudi Arabia, far more cost-effective and efficient. It might also provide Saudi Arabia with an export product other than oil.
If developing nuclear technology for the purposes of energy infrastructure doesn’t make sense, what other reasons might the Saudi monarchy have to undertake such a daunting task? The clues, of course, lie in their insistence that they be allowed to enrich their own fuel, that they will not permit international inspections of their enrichment facilities, and their very clear statement about their need for nuclear weapons to counter Iran.
Saudi Arabia engenders the most extreme Sunni sects that have produced the most virulent terrorist groups, like ISIL and Taliban. It is a short path from monarchy-held weapons to terrorist weapons.
3
Between oil and solar, the Saudis have all the energy they will ever need. They are not so subtly signaling that this deal is a pretense for and prelude to developing nuclear weapons. Given that we have a President who looks only at the immediate dollar and personal propaganda benefit he can wring from a deal without any consideration of long-term human or economic costs, it looks likely that the Middle East is going to enter an arms race. The mere thought that Rick Perry heads the agency vested with responsibility for overseeing these negotiations should also terrify anyone paying attention. Incompetence and greed have real, tragic costs that may increasingly be felt during the second, and hopefully last, half of this presidency. The years it will take to unwind the damage Trump is doing to our nation and the world is incalculable.
4
The Saudis want nuclear weapons. They want to be the most powerful nation in the Middle East. They want US help to achieve that.
Trump and Kushner need financing from the Saudis and their allies for their personal business endeavors.
Of course send in Rick Perry to negotiate, the man who didn’t know nuclear energy was within his purview when he was appointed secretary.
8
Can they be trusted? No.
Will they build a Bomb if given a chance? Yes.
All they have, for now, are brutality and oil. The sooner we get free of oil the better. Our shale “miracle” is going to buy us a decade or maybe two, not the 100 years that President Obama claimed or the forever the current simpleton seems to think, if he thinks at all.
5
Can the Saudis be trusted? I'd say no, but Trump would say yes. and Mitch McConnell backs up Trump 100 percent.
11
"Saudis Want a U.S. Nuclear Deal. Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?"
Is this really the right question? Shouldn't we be asking ourselves how much money we can squeeze out of the deal? And shouldn't we also be asking which Trump-owned company will have the task of receiving the profits? Or will this be the once-in-a-lifetime event when our fearless leader shows some largesse and bestows this honor on a deserving soul like Eliot Broidy, or Erik Prince through some sleight of hand deal involving his sister the inestimable Betsy De Vos?
I wait with baited breath.
6
Trump equates in his own mind the buying of condos from him with the sale of nuclear reactors to the Saudis. Now we never had an adequate explanation of the Saudis ties to 9/11. Most of the hijackers were Saudis and there has been vague talk about support from Saudi royals for that venture. This means a potential conduit of a uranium fueled bomb in the hands of terrorists. Trump will love it as long as the Saudi's emoluments keep rolling in.
7
It would be absolute insanity to assist any islamic theocracy in acquiring nuclear capability.
However, I would support educating the Saudis about developing their greatest potential resource besides oil: solar energy.
15
The most obvious truths are too often vehemently denied. Saudi Arabia does not need nuclear power to keep the lights on. The Royal Family thirsts for the prestige of nuclear weapons power. The notion that if we don't help them somebody else will, is as base as their own lust for power.
4
The saddest part about all of this is that Trump would be amenable to this because of the $80B America would get for the deal. It is amazing that the people surrounding Trump would go along with this madness. Saudi Arabia is already getting $110B worth of military equipment. SA says they need cheap energy, go solar. SA has already shown what they would do in a war situation, look at all of the civilian casualties in Yemen, let alone the innocent children who are starving. The recent death of Mr. Khashoggi should be enough to show us that we can't trust MSB to tell the truth, let alone what happened with 9/11. It's a shame this information didn't come out before the election, had it come out there might have been a change with the Senate, too.
7
I don’t have any trust in the Saudi Leadership. They’ve changed how their govt has always been set up before this new regime came to power. There were minor checks & balances on the govt before, but now it’s all ran by one non-trustworthy person. I also feel our President is not trustworthy due to lack of experience. Neither of them should be close to nuclear power of any type, let alone a bomb!
6
He's not trustworthy due to inexperience? No! No! It's that he might be criminally insane or some other dangerous condition outlined in a book written by 27 prominent people in the mental health field. " The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump". It is mandatory reading for the responsible citizen. For some reason this book has gotten minimum publicity. Israel should be very worried.
1
Addressing the question posed beneath the headline: No.
Both Saudi Arabia and Iran are taking the long view of things, and want to be the political head of the Islamic world. They also want to vanquish the other, influence greatly the world's economy and control, or eliminate Israel.
Sales of any military applicable technology, by anyone, should be carefully monitored and regulated, and may even be considered a hostile act.
3
What the heck, what do we have to lose? We should trust MBS. Let them develop nuclear stuff because they will never use it for violent purposes. And imagine, just imagine, the jobs created and how much Saudi Arabia will pay us!
This is simply too good to pass up.
8
Think of the money and jobs. Look the guy has impeccable judgment . And think of it with a bomb they can get rid of Iran and we don't have to do it. The only issue is how much do they pay and how many jobs does it create. Win win. Never get tired of it.
2
A regime led by murderer Crown Prince MBS cannot be trusted. Period.
12
Oh sure, they’re bothering civilians and starving children in Yemen and their leader just ordered the murder of one of their citizens who was a US resident and a journalist for the Washington Post. I don’t see what could possibly go wrong.
29
Much of America might wish to simplify this down to Rambo-levels of morality, but the crown prince of Saudi Arabia clearly ordered a journalist murdered in cold blood. I don't doubt for a moment that America has done the same thing to people at home and abroad when it has been politically expedient, but the question of arming this man with nuclear weapons after he murdered one of our journalists should not even be a question. We don't provide insane leaders of terrorist organizations with weapons of mass destruction. . .do we?
26
Let’s hope not. But think about it, do you trust Trump to make the right decisions on anything?
8
...deny them. Let China or some other country provide nuclear engineering/equipment for the Saudis. The government is insidious and has carried out bombings in Yemen on civilians. They've killed tens of thousands - and just assassinated Khashoggi. They're barbarians at the gate, and the US shouldn't be the ones to open it. I have no sympathy for their energy needs - they have enough oil to supply themselves indefinitely. We don't need any more countries with the ability to develop nuclear weapons. We may not be able to stop them, like Iran, but we don't have to provide support.
14
Please admit that this is some kind of macabre joke. This is the same “ally” which bears major responsibility for the 9/11 attack.
Imagine a nuclear weapon being detonated in New York or Washington.
It would be shockingly irresponsible to give this murderous, medieval monarchy that capability. Surely even the obsequious GOP Senate can understand that.
43
I wouldn’t count on it. If it smells like money, they won’t be able to resist.
10
"Saudi Arabia insists on producing its own nuclear fuel"
I'm having a hard time understanding how Saudi Arabia is in a position to insist on anything, especially from the US. Oh wait, one of the Trumps must need another bailout.
27
Does any sane person really trust the Saudis? Aside from buying apartments in Trump Tower, what have they done to buy any more trust than the Iranians--who signed a nuclear deal?
10
Not sure in what alternate universe iran wouldn't take this as permission to scale up to nuclear weapons.
14
Trump/Kushner business relationship(s) with the Saudi's is perhaps more sinister than their Russian connections. The Saudi's would be only too happy to keep feeding cash into the leveredged maw of the Trump/Kushner real estate "empire" knowing that Trump will back whatever play they want to make. Murder of a journalist? No problem. Nuclear fuel facilities? Coming right up!
As with Iran, why would a country with petroleum oozing out of every pore go to such trouble to build nuclear power plants? Environmental concerns?
12
We have to remember the current ruling family in Saudi Arabia is well know for it's many human rights violations. An it's torture and mutilation of it's own citizens. The continued bombing of innocent civilians in Yemen, causing the death of tens of thousands of women and children. The assassination of a journalist on foreign soil. An the ruling family of Saudi Arabia will now be trusted with nuclear weapons? We as citizens of the US need to determine who we our and what we stand for and believe. An let our elected representatives in the federal government know our answer! Because the truth is Trump is looking out for Trump!
2
"Saudis Want a U.S. Nuclear Deal. Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?"
They're going to build the bomb regardless of what the USA says or doesn't say.
The question now is: Who's going to build the bomb for them?
4
@Majortrout
Russia or China.
The argument for doing it that could pass with the Senate is the same one that is being used to underwrite the big weapons deal now underway: if we don't do it, the Russians (or Chinese) will.
This is not an empty threat. It has happened before.
That is how Iran, starting with Nuclear Power Plants, got ginned up to the Almost Nuke Weapon status it holds today. We started the program there in 1975, under the Shah. But in 1979 the Iranian Revolution brought things to a halt. Iran then got help from Pakistan and China. Then in 1995, the Russians signed on, against our (pro forma) protests.
It is likely that there is no way to stop this in Saudi. Probably the most strategic thing we could do is to build them ourselves, where we would at least have the technological link with insight into their inevitable future covert capabilities. Truly a devil's bargain.
2
The destabilizing effect of this policy change will be immediate. As soon as the Saudis begin developing their nuclear capacity, Iran will resume their nuclear program. It's difficult to see any outcome from that that won't end in catastrophic war. I said on the day Trump was elected that millions would die as a result; I hoped I was exaggerating, but we're moving in that direction more rapidly than I feared.
5
it would be obvious lunacy to in any way facilitate the acquisition of nuclear weapons by a government that has so recently demonstrated its subhuman, monstrous nature. They make Iran look supremely enlightened by comparison. Clearly we are on the wrong side...
4
Big, big, very big mistake. The countries rulers are untrustworthy. Just like the US.
3
As someone who has spent a fair bit of heir life in the GCC countries, (and even if I hadn’t), this is one of the dumbest, dumbest ideas EVER.
We Americans are fools to be played by these countries. All the oil fields, glittering shopping malls, museums, indoor ski slopes, outposts of our universities, do not change the fact that these are tribal societies. No. 1: they are NOT our friends and as importantly, they do not view us as their friends.
Do this at our own peril.
13
The Saudi's have many times over the years proven themselves not worthy of trust while still being an important partner, given greater risks we face in the region. Any program that could result in them getting nuclear weapons would be foolhardy on our part since it would fundamentally change the mutual dependency balance currently in place. The Khashogi murder provides an opportunity for us to reset the balance more in our favour and that is where we should be focusing; making for an easy dismissal and any atomic weapon goals that Saudi Arabia could even conceivably have. Let Saudi Arabia at least act as our best example of a separation of these two subjects.
3
Why even ask the question 'can they be trusted?' when we know the answer? No. Absolutely not. Not the monarchy, not the people. 9/11 was perpetrated by Saudis.
7
The Times article sets out all the facts, Saudi Arabia wants the bomb. Their political leader imprisons and kills Saudi citizens with no regard other than their precived needs.
Having once excepted a job with Saudi Aramco I later declined the offer after completing a cultural training course. The Saudi worldview is not only completely different than ours it is adverse to American culture.
As terrible as the idea is of providing a means to a Saudi Bomb it must be inconciveible when we regard this not with American eyes but from the Saudi view.
2
The article poses a simple question: "Can the Saudis be trusted not to build a (nuclear) bomb?" Lets's see... Saudi Arabia actively supports and promotes a radical violent and intolerant version of Islam. Saudi Arabia has lied continuously about an act of murder and terrorism against a U.S. resident whose only "crime" was to disagree with Saudi policies and write about them. Over a dozen Saudis, led by a Saudi, attacked the U.S. on 9/11. The Middle East is a tinderbox and the stability of not only the Saudi regime is/are seriously questionable. Sure. Give the Saudis nuclear technology. What could possibly go wrong?
4
Our goal should be the elimination of all nuclear weapons in the world through verifiable treaties. A good first step would be to eliminate nuclear power as well. Nuclear power plants are dirty, expensive, and dangerous. Solar and wind power are less expensive, more practical, and healthier - those are the options we should be pursuing, both here and internationally.
3
Yes ban all nuclear bombs but nuclear energy producing -CO2 free- electrons are just what we need now as we gear up to approach 100% renewables. Even aviation fuel can be produced with renewables but current production levels have a ways to go.
Someone should give Trump a world globe—a free-standing one; not one anchored at the poles and limited to rotation on a single axis.
A free-standing globe allows an observer to view the world from an infinite degree of rotations. It will allow an observer to see the many ways the world is connected. The limitless connectivity of nation-states can reveal why some nations find it worth-while to align themselves with other nations and why some nations defy specific alignments.
A free-standing globe allows one to review the entirety of world history with less knowledge of world affairs than an elementary school kid would have.
Historically, nations have shaped their behavior by the connectivity and or distance from one another and the ease or difficulty of transit between them.
For example, a free-standing globe would have revealed the connectivity of the nation’s sharing the Pacific Ocean as a common border and why the Trans Pacific Partnership was a demonstration of a supreme knowledge of geography.
For a man, standing in the burnt remains of a town once called “Paradise” and repeatedly calling it “Pleasure,” a knowledge of geography would be extremely important for the future of America.
4
Since we're kind of talking about 'rocket science' here, well no, the chatter about what the Saudis have up their flowing robes is not rocket science. We cannot trust them.
With their days of being king-maker when it comes to their having their foot on the world's throat when it comes to oil production and dictating the price of a barrel of oil. especially what we'll have to pay at the pump, well, they're winding down.
Frack-gas, how the oil industry refers to the gas we pump at the filling station, has changed things, not only here, but throughout the world. We're now one of the largest exporters of oil and natural gas.
And those sanctions Obama placed on Russia continue to take a toll on their providing oil throughout eastern Europe.
And by the way, the reason for Russia's involvement in the 2016 election, meddling to get Trump elected? Guess what? Obama's sanctions.They hated Clinton for her sanctions-support and her promise to continue that support when elected, believing Trump would end those sanctions. It's that simple and why Russia took Clinton to task and got her defeated.
Saudi and Russia oil are the issue here, with the Saudis now looking for another card to play in this world-stage 'stakes-game'.
4
There it is. The shoe drops. That's what the Saudi's have wanted all along. Defense autonomy.
Yeah right, sell Armageddon arms to the country that gave us OBL, half the 9/11 attackers, and the world we live in today. This is so surreal.
How this current administration can be so obtuse is beyond me. Add to that a stagnant and weak Senate/Congress and half of the country's voters being stubborn and paranoid enough to stick with this predicament. The Perfect Storm.
21
A hot country like Saudi Arabia should be building solar plants, definitely not nuclear plants.
No new nuclear facilities should be started; the toxic nuclear waste is not manageable. That's true for any country in the world.
Yet joining the nuclear-armed club gives a country tremendous power. N. Korea is the latest example. So of course Saudi Arabia is fighting hard to get the bomb.
What happened to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty? What happened to the Iran nuclear deal, which was being upheld? I can't believe the profits to Westinghouse and S. Korean entities can be the true reason for allowing the Saudis into the club. But, whatever the reason, it must be stopped.
14
The Kashoogi case answers the question of trust with Saudi Arabia right now. I think it is obvious. Now whether other interests are likely to override this blatant fact: that is unfortunately likely, particularly in the given relationship between Trump and the house of Saudi. The main pressure is going to come from the international community: when leadership fails, another one rises...
6
This story gets better and better each day---give the head of the Saudi mob a nuclear weapon---what could go wrong.
7
Russia and China are not that stupid to sell the Saudis nuclear parts. Why would South Korea want to do that? The only one who might be willing to do it because money is paramount is Trump.
8
@Wayne
No Wayne , the Israel Lobby will not let the USA sell nuclear technology to SA , period. The Lobby controls both Congress & the WH. There are others who have the technology that might be prepared to buck the USA-Israel Lobby , at least on a down low basis. eg Pakistan.
That MBS thinks that the USA would be allowed to arm SA with nukes says how unaware he is about who controls the USA`s Near East policies.
An incompetent negotiator looking for an alternative way to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon might believe that threatening to let the Saudis develop one might seem to be a good strategy. We should all feel safe that the world's preeminent deal maker and a master of foreign diplomacy is running our country. Why be suspicious?
7
In Trump's eyes, everything is a "deal" and this is a big one. He cares not one whit about this country. It is simply a component of his "deals."
7
@Mister Ed
I tried to do business for a few years with a person who reminds me a lot of Trump, the way he speaks, where he is from, his behavior as if a bit player in a Scorsese movie.
After I came to the conclusion that none of the deals this guy supposedly was offering (probably was laundering money and what I had to offer was too clean and transparent) would ever come through for me, I asked myself how could I not have seen that sooner.
First - I wanted and needed a deal. Delusion sets in.
Second - I believe this guy, despite having been bankrupt before and constantly presenting new partners who sooner or later did not want to do anything with him anymore, saw nothing wrong with his deals or his proposals. He believed in the junk he sold and it was his believe that made me believe I think, for too long.
1
This should be a "no brainer", and not just because we don't trust MBS. There are already at least 2000 atomic bombs in the world we (and our children) inhabit. Any 50 to 70 of these weapons of mass destruction would render our world unfit for life. We should be finding the courage and the ways to get rid of ALL of these frightful things rather than discussing which should be the next country to have them.
Don't we care about our children and their futures? Nobody wins in a nuclear war.
10
Giving nuclear capabilities to the Saudis is like having unprotected guns around the house where children are playing. Both of these are apparently AOK with our President, which shows his level of thoughtfulness and responsibility.
10
This is such a complex decision. I am not sure Trump is truly capable of understanding what it means or has the interest in understanding what it means. There is the issue of Iran, and prior attempts by Saudi Arabia to "buy" a weapon from Pakistan, and the implication of nuclear reactors close to Israel. Will Israel agree to Nuclear reactors in Saudi Arabia? Why can't they switch to solar for energy needs? Don't they have plenty of Sunny days? I think Iran is less likely to use a nuclear weapon than this man in charge of Saudi Arabia. Congress should differ this decision until Trump is gone!
11
what would be the price of selling nuclear technology to the Saudis?
how about a mortgage on the Tishman building, forgiven in six months? is that enough?
what would be the cost?
5
There is a much bigger issue here; The spread of weapons of mass destruction. It was decided by previous administrations, (i.e., both Republicans and Democrats) as well as the Western allies to try negotiating with rogue states. All this did is put off the date these rogue states would obtain such weapons and delivery systems. Do you really think that Saudi Arabia or Egypt will sit by while Iran builds the technology to build these weapons and delivery technology. The genie is out of the bottle. Perhaps we can buy ten years, but the day of reckoning is coming, where we will live in a much more dangerous world.
3
NO. Have we forgotten that the majority of the participants in both attacks on the World Trade Center were Saudis? How does this country continue to get a pass? Oh! I forgot. First it was their oil, now it's their money (always has been) to support Trump's empire.
59
The idea of a nuclear armed Saudi Arabia is a truely appauling prospect especially if one considers the conduct of the person who is most likely to become the country's future ruler.
Saudia Arabia's behaviour in the Yemen, its reckless disregard of civilian casualties and of the long term consequences of the humanitarian disaster which the war has created, are all powerful indicators of the manner in which it is likely to act in the future.
In which case the international community must do everything in its power to prevent such a disastrous outcome.
8
If the US helps MbS gain nuclear technology without a "Golden" agreement (which SA refuses to sign), we become the chumps of the world, if we aren't already with Trump at the helm. SA is obviously not to be trusted.
Our relationship with SA is predicated on several factors:
1) They offer pushback against Iranian influence in the area.
2) They work with the US to control the price of oil.
3) They align with Netanyahu and in effect give Israel a powerful friend in the ME.
Trump has said a number of times that he wants to spread out nuclear arms ability across more countries than now have it. He has stated that SKorea and Japan should be able to protect themselves instead of the US having to shoulder the burden. He has thrown out the only effective agreement to corral Iran's nuclear development and so assures that Iran will develop nuclear weapons in the near future. That gives Trump even more motivation to proved SA with nuclear "wink wink" technology.
Trump is an agitator. Both domestically and globally. He should be held to account before it is too late.
Recipe for disaster: Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia as nuclear powers. We must not let Trump (or Bolton) lead this particular way. It requires veto proof majorities in the House or Senate.
3
Since Trump opened Pandora's Box and removed the one instrument that could possibly keep the Iranians in check from becoming a nuclear gunslinger in the Middle East, what else can the Saudis do? Mutually Assured Destruction is not a remedy exclusive to the super powers.
1
@TIm Love The mutually assured destruction caused by nuclear war will not leave you healthy, happy or rich. There will be no safe place to continue life as we know it in a nuclear war ridden world. We already have the problem of too many people for the carrying capacity of the planet but killing most of them won't help since it will also kill the plants and animals. Sorry, if you meant this as irony and I missed the markers.
Some people here seem to think that we will have a some choice in Saudi Arabia becoming a nuclear country. This will happen. They have the money and the motivation to do this. If Israel and Pakistan and India have nuclear programs, the Saudis will also. Science and technology in these countries is just now starting to catch up to where the US was in the 1940s. Nuclear proliferation is inevitable. We can be on the front end or the back end of this and it may be better to be on the front end.
If alternative energy is the goal, and not nuclear weapons development, then why not go solar? The landscape and terrain of Saudi Arabia lends itself clearly to that. Thus, there ia clearly an ulterior motive.
48
Saudi Arabia has clamouring for nuclear weapons for a long time since it's arch rival, Iran is on the threshold of such weapons. At present Iran has edge over Saudis. To maintain the balance, Riyadh has been exerting considerable pressure on US on nuclear energy for peaceful use (initially)
later converts spent fuel for producing weapons. Riyadh claims that it has huge uranium deposits, it can process fuel on its soil instead depending on foreign countries like US, Canada, Russia,or France etc. MBS wanted a self-control over nuclear project for enriched uraniam for self-reliant. It seems that Saudi Arabia has learnt lessons from India about the abrupt stoppage of fuel from US in post -Pokhran explosion.
Though the American Congress is not inclined to supply nuclear technology at present, Trump is in favour of arming Riyadh to contain Teheran in the Middle East.
Since Saudi Arabia has lost credibility of US lawmakers responsible for enacting legislation authorising President for nuclear accord, it may turn on Russia/China/Pakistan for building nuclear power projects. In the cloak of secret negotiations on nuclear related matters , Riyadh has agreed to bail out Pakistan ,Sunni country,
from debts.
The nuclear power countries such as US, Russia,China, Pakistan etc are responsible for proliferation of technology without any safeguards like permissions from IAEA,MTCR, London based elite nuclear club,NSG and later blaming each other about proliferation to autocratic regimes.
8
Is there no principle, are there no moral standards governing this administration? If Saudi Arabia is to acquire nukes then let Russia or China or Israel be the complicit partner. No amount of money, no amount of jobs, warrant U.S. involvement in such a deal.
As for nuclear power plants, one has to ask why a nation bathed in such intense sunlight doesn't exploit that resource instead. It's cheaper, cleaner, safer, and will last forever. At the earth's current consumption (18 terawatts) Saudi Arabia could power the entire planet with standard residential solar panels (at roughly 20% efficiency per 18 square foot panel) placed on just 4.5 percent of its desert. (which, of course, begs the question why humanity pursues any other form of energy). So, if Trump wants jobs and money for America strike a solar energy deal with Saudi Arabia and save the world from nuclear disaster, not to mention global warming.
99
@Chip Steiner
When it comes down to it, it isn't (and has never been) about morality. And it isn't about keeping the air conditioning going.
It is about projecting military power and the complexity of international relations. We can pretend otherwise (or forget this) at our peril. The only lasting peace that has ever existed, throughout history, has been made possible by warding off opportunistic would-be enemies through an understanding of viable, superior (or at least mutual) strength. Then come cultural and ethical standards, because our values are certainly worth upholding. Hopefully we are trying to accommodate both; but first things have to come first.
1
I wonder how far in the works this is. Rick Perry has visited Riyadh for discussions about nuclear power plants.
What has Kushner told MBS? Have he and Trump made any promises? This concerns me.
And with the Crown Prince stating he wants nuclear arms if Iran has them or can build them is downright scary. He’s a loose cannon.
Fortunately, Congress would have to approve any action involving nuclear power. While I trust the House I strongly hope the Senate GOP will find a backbone for this most important issue.
11
@Rebecca. If trump can get a deal & money into his account before Jan. 1st then he has the backing. Too bad no one has stopped to realize that the trouble between Iran & Saudi Arabia is really a religious war between the Muslim sects of Wahhabism (Saudis), Sunni & Shi’ite in Iran, Iraq, & Yemen.
Wahhabi is like the ultra Orthodox of Islam. Much more dangerous.
1
@Nostradamus Said So. I will add with the US backing out of the Iran deal. We have no oversight in an event of a nuclear arms race this could signal. Instead we will be actually encouraging Iran to acquire the tools for developing nukes IMO. You have to consider this development with the fact we backed out of the Iran deal and what that would mean to that region
1
I do believe that, at this moment in time with the current Administration in the US and with MBS knowing he can have anything he wants from Trump literally, any deal with the Saudis should be viewed with a great amount of caution and doubts for the consequences could be "catastrophic" for the US and the rest of the world.
24
@Marc-Antoine "I do believe that, at this moment in time with the current Administration in the US and with MBS knowing he can have anything he wants from Trump"
No , the Israel Lobby controls the US Congress and WH so there will be no US technology made available to arm SA with nukes. Israel will ensure that it , and only it , has the nuclear hammer in the region. Will SA find/use another source for nukes. It seems that they already have the connections with Pakistan and China to have a running start at it.
It all depends on what kind of nuclear power plants US/others want to sell.
If its thorium-based reactors I dont see a big problem, because it rather difficult to get weaponsgrade materiel from a this kind of reactor.
Or go for Generation IV reactors.
Generation III or III+ reactors might also be an option.
But if its uranium-base generation II reactors it is a no-go.
In any case Saudia Arabia must comply to same rules as Iran regarding oversight, production of fuel, nonproliferation treaty...
7
@Frank Larsen
Nuclear power is not cost effective, because there is no safe place to put nuclear waste, which remains dangerous for thousand of years.
As one commenter pointed out, the Saudis have a desert with near continuous sun. They should be building solar power not nukes. They obviously want a nuclear weapon. They said so.
3
I'm sure Trump thinks it's a great idea. But I'm also sure Congress and the Senate will see it for what it really is: The dumbest idea ever.
16
@Hans
At this moment in time, our Congress is controlled by Republicans. After January 3rd the Senate will still be controlled by Republicans. And, so far, Republicans have shown themselves willing to do whatever Trump wants them to do. So, don't assume the Congress will stop this idiot from giving the Saudis the means to blow up the world.
Giving the Saudis a bomb would make all of Trump's other decisions minor league ones. This is where Congress must do their job if such a matter is even considered.
76
@David
It helps if you read what you're responding to. They're looking for nuclear power plants.
Doesn't make it better, but neither does demonstrating that you haven't checked the material.
Just when I think the news and especially around this region/country can't get more absurd, well it does just that...
If this is true it ranks pretty high on a list of the most stupid things I have ever heard.
20
This would be insanity. The Saudis may be allies of convenience but I wouldn’t trust them with nukes any more than I’d trust my 3 year old nephew with a loaded handgun.
This is a no-brainer.
120
To answer the question in the headline, " Can the Saudis be trusted?", I would add a second question, " Can Donald Trump and Jared Kushner be trusted?" Answer to both: NO
444
Since assuming power, the 33 year-old crown prince has upended the leadership of Saudi Arabia through the imprisonment of other members of the royal family, undertaken a disastrous war in Yemen that has killed 85,000 children, and order the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Mohammed bin Salman has shown himself to be dictatorial, impetuous, lacking maturity, and volatile. Who could seriously consider giving Saudi Arabia, and in reality Prince Mohammed, nuclear weapons? How is this even a serious question?
292
@JEG
"Who could seriously consider giving Saudi Arabia, and in reality Prince Mohammed, nuclear weapons?"
President Donald J. Trump, that's who.
66
@JEG
I feel like this is a serious question.
Your description of MBS (dictatorial, impetuous , immature and volatile) could be applied to President Trump.
I would not be surprised if Mr. Trump considered giving Saudi Arabia nuclear capabilities.
35
@JEG
If giving the Saudis nukes will add to the Trumpo financial bottom line it’s all good.
Nothing, absolutely nothing else matters in the little man’s world.
6
This article also explains the president's love affair with the Saudis--I'm imagining there's a hefty price they would have to pay to have the US help them this (ostensibly) safe nuclear power program.
Was this part of what Donald Trump discussed with Putin in the closed door, no read-out session in Helsinki? Carving up the world to make it more volatile? Or what Jared Kushner was discussing with MBS into the wee hours of the Arabian nights?
Let's just throw in Rick Perry for laughs and get him involved with this mess.
The title asks, "Should the Saudis Be Trusted?"
Sure--all they've done recently is help their own terrorists launch the worst terror attack in history on US soil, and wage war in Yemen, where yesterday I read 85,000 children are in danger of starvation, according to Save the Children.
I won't mention Kashoggi, because apparently the president won't either. That gets swept under the rug of this master plan to help the young madman prince get the toys he needs to feel strong and powerful vis a vis Iran.
The whole potential deal is lunacy. We know it, the world knows it, and yet, the feckless US president seems to be blundering ahead with it.
Is this really "just" about money, or do the Saudis have something over the president?
200
@Darwinia: I agree 100%.
1
@ChristineMcM "Do the Saudis have something over the president?"
Is this really the right question? Wouldn't it be easier to ask - and require less time, paper and ink to answer - who .. DOESN'T .. have something on our fearless leader?
10
I wasn't aware that this was even under consideration. It's beyond insane. The Saudis have clearly demonstrated they have no compunctions about murdering dissidents beyond their own borders and Donald Trump has plainly signaled he's okay with that.
Anyone who thinks that (a) gifted with the ability to enrich nuclear fuel that they wouldn't develop weapons or (b) use them on their enemies, is simply delusional.
70
It doesn't matter if they can be trusted not to build a bomb. Not one of their neighbors will trust that the Saudis will not build a bomb. Perception is reality. They will be off to the races, including of course, Iran.
34
But, of course, the Saudis cannot be trusted not to build a bomb; so perception and reality are close to identical in this case.
Would have to be nuts to trust them . The Saudi people are great, their leadership is now questionable. Between Saudi Arabia and Iran the goal would be to have less nuclear power. One of them could create a nightmare.
10
Saudi Arabia is just about the last place on Earth that should have the ability to build the Bomb. And any nation that doesn’t have the native smarts to build its own nuclear plant probably doesn’t have the wisdom to use it safely.
19
@Robert Richardson
How does one use a nuclear bomb "safely?"
Nuclear weapons are anathema. They never should have been employed. The US is the prime culprit. That's a hard saying, but it's true. And now the question's what to do. Take killing people off the table now. Make state-inflicted death taboo. Make selling instruments of death a crime. There should be no silence on these points.. We have the ways we need to stop this wrong. One voice in ten can tip the scales. We're fallible but we're not powerless. There is a power in love that conquers all. No more nukes, no more civilian deaths, No more armies drafted or volunteer. Begin to contemplate a world at peace. Instead of naysayers sobriety. Imagine we have learned our lesson now. We'll get whatever future we allow,
134
@Stephen C. Rose
Yes the Constitution demands defense, not a global offense with troops stationed in or attacking almost every other country in the world.
We need to stop backing murderous dictators, which both parties have been doing since WWII, and start backing the peaceful and Democratic.
Since WWII, army country that actually invests in its own people, instead of abusing them, is labeled "socialist," and attacked with financial shenanigans, covert operations, or the military, while countries that terrorize their own populations and export terror to other countries are rewarded.
These countries include Saudi Arabia, but also, for example, Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador, the capitalist "success" stories in Central America where paramilitary death squads are allowed to terrorize the population with impunity to make those countries safe for global corporations to plunder and pollute.
Our neoliberal/neoconservative foreign policy is constantly making the world more dangerous and less equal.
I don't believe it is an accident that our second biggest ally in the Middle East is the world's leading exporter of terror propaganda. I believe that our government is purposefully making the world a more dangerous place to justify history's most awesome military and surveillance systems, which are used against countries that want to determine their own economic and political futures.
And now the billionaires that make U.S. foreign policy are doing the same thing to the USA.
15
@McGloin
“And now the billionaires that make U.S. foreign policy are doing the same thing to the USA.”
This is it!
2
The Middle East in many ways is still in the Middle Ages, and now we want to sell them nuclear weapons? What evidence is there that they would not be prepared to use them?
22
Based on Trumps obvious love for these wealthy murderers, he will likely give them anything they want. Question is, can Congress stop him?
72
@Ellwood Nonnemacher Yes, they can. The question is are they willing to go up against trump. So far, they haven't.
1
I’ve been wondering for 2 years what dirt the Russians have on Trump. Now I further wonder what dirt the Saudi’s have on Trump.
No American Patriot would allow this murder to go unanswered. Trump shrugs and says that maybe MBS did it and maybe he didn’t.
But then Trump for all his claims of being a “nationalist” is no American Patriot. He is both the 45th President in number as well as in deeds. Last and last.
29
Giving Saudi Arabia nukes? What can go wrong that?
51
@Sal Monella "Giving Saudi Arabia nukes? What can go wrong that? "
The TV show "South Park" is already working on an episode of how it works out. Rick Perry has a minor , dufass, role.
We should agree to the nuclear deal with SA on the condition that they hand over to the Turkish authorities MBS and the 16 Saudi government officials who have murdered a journalist. Without those conditions being met no deal should be had and all arms deals currently on the books canceled.
Furthermore I hope the Turks rename the road on which the Saudi Embassy sited for Jamal Khashoggi.
9
"As a precondition, American economic sanctions against Russia would have been dropped to allow Moscow to join the effort."
We always knew dropping Russian sanctions would be involved sooner or later.
But out of all the nightmare scenarios, getting involved with the Saudis on a nuclear program is sheer madness.
Just what the world needs: a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
This article is so rich: and I don't mean uranium enrichment.
84
@V Nagarajan We don't need their oil. They don't need a nuclear plant. They have so much Sun in the desert to use solar panel energy and fuel their country with that once the oil runs out.
I live in a world where the leaders have watched too much star war and end of the world destruction. Seem to be on a planet destruction path. We need to vote all those guys out and replace with more rational thinking caring politicians. Politicians who don't let money rule them. I hope it is not too late. Two years is a long time, and lots of scary decisions can be made by this administration.
18
@Darwinia: I agree 100%.
3
@Darwinia
I am afraid that there simply are no '...rational thinking caring politicians who don't let money rule them.' I wish there were but unfortunately the way the world of politicians is set up the two just do not go together. There is too much temptation - power corrupts and incorruptable politicians are as rare as hen's teeth.
And what message is sent to North Korea when we negotiate to let our friends develop nuclear capacity? Based upon the Saudi remarks about making nuclear weapons, no dictator will believe that everything is just for cleaner electricity. How likely is N. Korea to "denuclearize" (IMO, a long shot at any rate), if we are allowing the Saudis a path to nuclearize? How likely is it that Iran, a neighbor and enemy of Saudi Arabia, to resist making nukes or to be willing to negotiate some more at the end of the present agreement with the countries which kept their word and stayed in it, if the Saudis possibly have secret capacity to make bombs?
This is dangerous, indeed. What is most dangerous is having a gullible, needy man in the White House, who is easily swayed by wealth, ostentation, and 'important' people who pat him on the head regularly.
298
The entire Congress and the military leaders at the highest level should vigorously and publicly oppose this as well as all state governors and big city mayors. The very survival of our planet is threatened.
13
@V Nagarajan There are many Saudi engineering students at Western universities.
3
@Anne-Marie
"What is most dangerous is having a gullible, needy man in the White House, who is easily swayed by wealth, ostentation, and 'important' people who pat him on the head regularly."
Indeed. And who have lots and lots of cash to prop up mortgaged-to-the-eyeballs Trump/Kushner real estate ventures.
"You can pay us back in cash or, if you like..."
Perhaps a similar arrangement with the Russians?
Oh to see those tax returns!
2
At this point we would sell any weapon to any country if the price was right.
57
@gene
Trump would for sure. Am only a bit less certain abt Congress.
Parts of the Saudi government have been alleged to have helped in some way in the planning and execution of 9/11. Let that sink in for a bit and then decide whether they should have nuclear weapons.
505
Two years ago, MbS boasted in a local radio interview that the kingdom already had nuclear weapons from the Pakistani nuclear arms program, which was funded by the Saudis.
Saudi Arabia also has the missile bases and Pakistani as well as Chinese missiles needed to deliver nuclear weapons.
Especially the Pakistani Ghauri system that was explicitly developed to deliver nuclear war heads developed in Pakistan.
MbS even established a dedicated branch of the Saudi military to build and operate missile bases for the Ghauri and Dongfeng missile systems.
These missiles are pictured in action in the Cartoon that MbS used last year to show him as the liberator of Iran, including the explosion of a nuclear weapon over Tehran.
So what is the news here?
MbS is only repeating his words from two years ago.
Saudi Arabia already is a nuclear armed state.
26
Just like North Korea and Israel . So what ?
1
@joseph--Don't forget that the United States and Russia are armed to the teeth with nukes.
5
@joseph,
there is a huge difference in approach.
Israel is using the threat of nuclear annihilation, even to parties, e.g. Europe, not involved in a potential war as a threat to keep others fighting for its peace and safety.
Just look up a major item in every Israeli military doctrine since the 1970s, the "Samson Option".
This is nuclear blackmail on a global scale while pretending not to have any nuclear weapons, which Israel had since the 1960s. First with the help of the French and then with the help of the US.
Still, control over Israeli nukes is in the hands of somewhat sane people.
As for North Korea, that is a different matter as they do not ever use their weapons of mass destruction for anything else but as an economic bargaining chip.
There too are cold blooded controllers and brains that handle the nukes of North Korea.
The problem with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan is that these people believe in something that will reward you for what you do here in the afterlife, so dying is not a big thing.
And they are religious fanatics that mostly see enemies all around.
It is the expressed plan of Saudi Arabia to eliminate all non believers, starting with their biggest rival Iran - just across the Persian Gulf - Tehran is only a few flight minutes from the kingdoms missile base Al-Watah for a Ghauri missile and is the perfect target for this delivery system.
And as for Pakistan the situation is very similar as there too religious extremists have a finger on the red button.
2
plenty of civilian uses. larger question of geopolitical strategy in the middle east, particularly with Israel already having the bomb and Iran expressing interesting in developing one. one argument would be that it would guarantee saudi security on an external level, but there are questions about the internal stability of the kingdom
@sugarfraud
It would make Iranian nukes more likely, with the possibility that the Iranians and Saudis engage in a nuclear arms build up in the Middle East.
Why would the U.S. People want that?
2
Nuclear? Trusted? HA! I think Mr Trump's willing to sell the soul of the US, and blow up the world, for the chance to add more $$ bragging rights to his stump speeches. And now, with his willingness to still work with the MBS after the Khashoggi killing, it will be no holds barred as far as the Saudi's are concerned - they apparently are held to no standards and are forgiven if they cross any of ours.
108
@V Nagarajan, I'm waiting for pigs to fly.
What's in it for Trump? Personally? In dollars please. Unmarked.
64
We supported the Shah of Iran until his people turned on him. We are making exactly the same mistake with the House of Saud. Their people hate and despise them. Sooner or later later, Saudi Arabia will go the same way as Iran and the people will hate us.
201
@Dave Aldridge
Very good point. The longer we help the Saudi princes terrorize their own people with beheadings and assassinations, the more likely we are to end up with another Iranian style theocracy led by people who came to power by overthrowing our corrupt allies.
The U.S. keeps taking the side of abusive regimes against their own people, and now We have an abusive regime trying to overthrow the Constitution.
Isn't "overthrowing the Constitution" an exaggeration you ask?
Well when the president is personally attacking the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and hires an AG who says the Supreme Court shouldn't have been interpreting the Constitution for the last couple hundred years, and Trump claims that he can unilaterally decide who is a citizen by interpreting the 14th Amendment by executive order, etc., etc., no, I'm not exaggerating.
21
@Dave Aldridge
What information do you base this on? Do you automatically believe that the relationship between the Shah and the Irani people was the same as the relationship between the House of Saud and the Saudi people? Why do you do so? Seriously, if you have reasons and evidence, please provide them.
1
@Dave Aldridge
The difference is that Iran was a country with a long history of art, science, and civil order (including democracy).
Saudi Arabia has a history of sending people to fly planes into buildings.
1