US intelligence warns Saudi Arabia hasn't ruled out nuclear weapons development

A classified intelligence assessment delivered to Congress has concluded that Saudi Arabia has not foreclosed the possibility of developing nuclear weapons, according to reporting from The Washington Post. The warning arrives in the wake of a July agreement between Washington and Riyadh that would permit Saudi Arabia to develop uranium enrichment capabilities ostensibly for civilian nuclear purposes—a move that has triggered alarm among lawmakers and Israeli officials who fear the technology could eventually serve weapons ambitions.

The agreement itself represents a significant departure from longstanding US policy. Under its terms, Saudi Arabia would be allowed to enrich uranium to nearly 20 percent, a level well below weapons-grade material but one that could be further processed into weapons-usable fuel within a relatively short timeframe. The arrangement also grants US companies a dominant role in developing Saudi Arabia's nuclear infrastructure over the next three decades, effectively excluding foreign competitors and positioning American businesses to capture tens of billions of dollars in contracts.

Democratic senators have moved quickly to challenge the deal. A group led by Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey and Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday, arguing that the agreement sets in motion a process that is "all but certain to allow Riyadh to acquire the means to enrich uranium and possibly develop nuclear weapons." Merkley was blunt in his assessment, suggesting that if Saudi Arabia had genuinely abandoned nuclear weapons ambitions, it would accept strict international inspections and forgo domestic enrichment capabilities. "If they've given up the intent to develop a nuclear weapon, then they'd give up domestic enrichment and reprocessing power, right? They'd accept massive inspections from the IAEA," he said.

The concern takes on particular weight given the regional context. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has previously stated that Riyadh would pursue nuclear weapons development if Iran did the same. Markey connected the agreement directly to this dynamic, warning that any acceleration of Saudi nuclear capabilities would only intensify an arms race already underway. "It is very clear that as this war in Iran continues to unfold, that the Iranians are going to fiercely defend their ability to develop a nuclear weapons program, and as a result, any action that we take in Saudi Arabia will only further accelerate a fallout nuclear arms race in the region," he said.

The Democratic senators also raised questions about financial interests embedded in the agreement. Jared Kushner, who served as a senior adviser during the first Trump administration, accepted a $2 billion investment from a Saudi sovereign wealth fund after leaving the White House. Westinghouse Electric, the nuclear power company positioned to capture substantial contracts under the deal, has its majority owner closely associated with Newmark, a real estate firm run in part by the sons of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. These connections have prompted criticism that administration officials stand to benefit personally from the arrangement.

The Republican-controlled Congress does not appear positioned to block the agreement's implementation, despite the warnings from Democratic lawmakers and the classified intelligence assessment. The deal represents a strategic realignment in US-Saudi relations, one that prioritizes economic and geopolitical partnership even as it introduces new uncertainties into an already volatile region. Israel, an undeclared nuclear power, and Iran, which has long pursued uranium enrichment capabilities, now face the prospect of a third regional actor moving closer to nuclear weapons capacity. The intelligence community's assessment that Saudi Arabia has not ruled out nuclear development suggests that the line between civilian and military nuclear ambitions remains deliberately blurred—and that the coming years will test whether that ambiguity can be sustained without triggering the very arms race the agreement's architects claim to want to prevent.