WASHINGTON, July 22 — A civilian nuclear cooperation agreement between the United States and Saudi Arabia is now in the hands of Congress, starting a 90-day review clock that will determine whether the deal moves forward. The Trump administration submitted the agreement earlier this week, triggering hearings before the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Lawmakers have the option to pass a joint resolution of disapproval — but even if they do, President Trump can veto it, and a two-thirds majority in both chambers would be required to override. If no resolution passes, the agreement automatically enters force after the 90-day period.
Saudi Arabia then must ratify it through a royal decree and publish the implementing regulations. Think of the whole process like getting a major construction permit for a skyscraper — except the building splits atoms for power and sits in a desert kingdom with a complicated geopolitical footprint. The practical upshot: Washington gets a say in how Riyadh builds its first nuclear power plant, and Saudi Arabia gets access to American nuclear technology under strict conditions.
In plain terms, this is a classic 123 agreement — named for Section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act — that sets the legal framework for nuclear cooperation. The sticking point, as always, is what happens to the spent fuel.
Where the reactor would go
The first reactor is likely to be built at the site of the King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy — known as KACARE — near Riyadh. Construction was originally expected to begin in 2024, pending regulatory approvals, but as of this summer that milestone remains unconfirmed. The Saudi Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Commission still needs to issue a construction license before any ground can be broken.
Saudi energy officials have said the first reactor could come online by 2027, though that timeline depends on clearing the licensing and congressional hurdles first. The Energy Department will handle the licensing of specific nuclear technology transfers — meaning it decides which reactor designs and components can be sent to Saudi Arabia.
The deal also requires the two countries to negotiate a separate agreement on spent fuel management, a sensitive issue given concerns about nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Without that separate deal, there is no permanent plan for the radioactive waste that the reactor will produce over its decades-long life.
The broader goals
The Trump administration hopes to have the entire Saudi nuclear program operational by 2030, a target that would require multiple reactors online in a relatively short time. That ambition reflects a larger strategic push — strengthening ties with a key Gulf ally while offering an alternative to Chinese or Russian nuclear vendors. For Saudi Arabia, the deal provides a pathway to diversify its energy mix away from oil, though the timeline has already slipped from earlier optimistic projections.
What happens next is predictable in structure, not in outcome. The 90-day review period gives lawmakers a window to scrutinize the nonproliferation safeguards and the spent-fuel arrangement.
If they find the deal lacking, the disapproval process gives them a tool to block it — but the veto math makes an override difficult. For ordinary readers, the real question is less about the procedural mechanics and more about the underlying trade-off: American technology for Saudi ambitions, with the region’s stability hanging in the balance.
