Friday, July 24, 2026

The Saudi nuclear program: what else did anyone expect?

 

I'm cynically amused by the brouhaha over the US deal with Saudi Arabia to help that country develop a peaceful - underline, peaceful - nuclear energy program, including (it seems) enriching nuclear fuel.

Consider the facts of the current situation, in no particular order.

  • Saudi Arabia bankrolled much of Pakistan's nuclear program, including its nuclear warheads and missiles.  It's long been rumored among "those in the know" that Pakistan has guaranteed Saudi Arabia that it can have nuclear warheads at twenty-four hours' notice, in an emergency.
  • Saudi Arabia has bought Chinese ballistic missiles that can carry nuclear warheads.  By strange coincidence, they're the same type of ballistic missiles that Pakistan has in its nuclear silos.  Odd, that . . .
  • Iran has launched missile attacks on Saudi Arabian territory from the north, using cruise and ballistic missiles.  Its Houthi allies have done the same from Yemen in the south.  That would be enough to make any nation a little paranoid.  What if the Iranian Revolutionary Islamic Guard, or whatever it calls itself these days, were to figure out how to put nuclear payloads on those missiles - either a full-blown nuke warhead, or a "dirty nuke" using conventional explosives to spread radioactive material around, say, Riyadh or a major military base?
  • Israel has for decades maintained that it will neither confirm nor deny that it has nuclear weapons.  Anyone with two working brain cells to rub together is quite confident that they have more than a few, almost certainly including major thermonuclear weapons.  See my comments in these pages from time to time concerning the so-called "Vela incident".
  • Given those various and sundry realities and threats, it was obvious that Saudi Arabia was going to go ahead and greatly expand its nuclear program(s).  It didn't really have any choice but to do so, if it was to survive in an environment like that.
That being the case, why is anybody surprised that President Trump would try to get involved with Saudi Arabia's plans and help them along?  Saudi was going to do it anyway.  We could have sat there and criticized, or expressed concern, or whatever - which would have bounced off Saudi's national interests like water off a duck's back.  This was a case of making the best of two very difficult and unpalatable choices, and I think the President acted wisely.  I'm sure he, and the US establishment, would rather not have made that choice, but as I said earlier, this was going to happen whether or not we were involved.

As for the fat-headed reports that the President was/is at odds with his Energy Secretary over what was done, and how it was done . . . yeah, right.  As if any Secretary in the President's cabinet is going to land a surprise like that on his boss's desk, without so much as a "by your leave"!  Sure, there may have been friction in the give-and-take between the White House and the Energy Department, but what else is new?  The very fact that the Energy Secretary still has his job is sufficient evidence that any such friction was relatively minor.

I'm also enjoying outraged suggestions from the left that the President is trying to stretch the agreement in new ways by pressuring Saudi Arabia to accept the Abraham Accords in exchange for US nuclear help.  There's nothing new in this:  President Trump has been trying to persuade Saudi Arabia to sign on to the Accords ever since he took office.  It might be a very useful talking point to mention that if Israel finds Saudi Arabia diplomatically cooperative, some of the former's nuclear warheads may no longer needed to be targeted at the Arabian peninsula.  In Saudi's position, I'd find that a very thought-provoking consideration . . .

Overall, I think America joining Saudi's nuclear program as a partner nation has far more positives than negatives.  It will also make Iran rethink its nuclear ambitions, given that the existing Saudi-Pakistan nuclear relationship might put them between two actinic fires, so to speak.

What's next in the Middle East?  Your guess is as good as mine . . . but it's likely to be "interesting", in the sense of the fabled ancient Chinese curse!

Peter


9 comments:

  1. Yeah, like signing the "Accords" wouldn't prevent any nuclear incidents between Israel, America and the House of Saud.

    They are not as monolithic as you think. Bib Ladin was a minor Saudi Prince. You know 911 and all that.

    SNIP Fifteen of the 911 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, two were from the United Arab Emirates, one was from Lebanon.

    Grimly laughable that Trumps all for protecting Israel from Iran's "nuke dust" and proving Saudi Arabia with nuke capability.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Given the fact that Saudis are muslim and they do not consider any agreement with infidels (US) to be valid, why are we trying to get them to sign anything? They practice the ultimate 'go along to get along' until they can take over the world.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I remember reports that Israel had roughly 300 uranium implosion gadgets. Not sure if they have ballistic missile delivery ability. Nuclear capable jet fighters are a thing now. Intelligence inputs can include things like the thermal signature of the atomic facility, power consumption, and freight traffic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 30 seconds asking about Israels ballistic missiles:
      SNIP
      Israel maintains a technologically advanced ballistic missile arsenal, centered on the Jericho series, complemented by sophisticated missile defense systems.
      Strategic Ballistic Missiles
      Israel’s primary long-range ballistic missiles are the Jericho series, which serve as the backbone of its strategic deterrent. The Jericho missiles are believed to include:

      Jericho I: Short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) with a range of approximately 500 km.
      Jericho II: Medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) capable of reaching 1,500–1,800 km, covering much of the Middle East.
      Jericho III: Intercontinental-range missile (ICBM) with an estimated range of 4,800–6,500 km, potentially capable of carrying conventional or nuclear warheads
      CSIS | Center for Strategic and International Studies
      .
      Israel does not publicly disclose the exact number of operational missiles, but open-source assessments suggest a limited but highly capable stockpile, sufficient for strategic deterrence
      CSIS | Center for Strategic and International Studies

      I will cut and paste again: Jericho III: Intercontinental-range missile (ICBM) with an estimated range of 4,800–6,500 km, potentially capable of carrying conventional or nuclear warheads.

      Get out your map's folks. That includes much of America.

      Funny NOT funny a nation that has the Sampson Option can reach most of America with nukes.

      SNIP Including results for Samson Option.
      Do you want results only for Sampson Option?
      The Samson Option is Israel’s nuclear last-resort strategy, threatening massive retaliation if the nation’s survival is at stake.
      Definition and Origin
      The Samson Option (Hebrew: b'rerat shimshon) is a deterrence strategy in which Israel would use nuclear weapons as a "last resort" against any country that has invaded or destroyed much of Israel.

      Samson Option has been discussed for those that BETRAY ISRAEL to its enemies also.

      Yeah, Israel is really going to like Saudi Arabia having nuke capability and might think poorly of those that gave it to them.

      Delete
  4. Tom Lehrer - Who's Next
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRLON3ddZIw

    ReplyDelete
  5. I remember rumors that the Saudis paid Pakistan for nukes if needed some time ago.
    Anymore, I trust no Islamics at all, in any way or capacity.
    John in Indy

    ReplyDelete
  6. These are the same people who bankrolled 9/11 and cut off our oil imports in the 70's... What could POSSIBLY go wrong here?...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Nope... agree with the others, NOT worth the hate and discontent that will come in the future!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Having worked in Saudi (briefly) and seen the way they treat equipment, They either need to buy a service agreement, pay for Non-Saudi people to mind the store, or not be surprised when the things don't work. Either way, I'm not too terribly worried.

    ReplyDelete

ALL COMMENTS ARE MODERATED. THEY WILL APPEAR AFTER OWNER APPROVAL, WHICH MAY BE DELAYED.