The draft nuclear accord between Washington and Riyadh has sat unsigned since October 2025. That is the finding of a CNN investigation published on July 18, 2026, which drew on documents the network reviewed and on sources familiar with the matter. The deal would let Saudi Arabia enrich uranium without the standard international inspection add-on that most nuclear partners accept.
Negotiations ended last October. At the time, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said: “We’ve come together on a deal for civil nuclear cooperation.” The White House declined to answer CNN’s questions about the agreements and pointed back to that statement. The Saudi embassy in Washington did not respond.
What the documents show
Two instruments make up the package: a civil nuclear cooperation deal known as a 123 agreement, and a mandatory safeguards agreement. Four sources told CNN neither has gone to Congress for review, which federal law requires once the president signs.
The record points to two features that worry critics. First, the arrangement would allow a degree of domestic uranium enrichment or plutonium reprocessing. One source, describing a briefing given to some lawmakers earlier this year, called that “unprecedented” for such a deal. Two sources said the enrichment provision carries stipulations imposed by the United States, though the limits are unclear.
Second, Saudi Arabia would not have to adopt the Additional Protocol, the enhanced safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency. A waiver the administration submitted to Congress last year and a State Department letter to lawmakers in May both say as much, according to CNN. Oversight would instead run through a bilateral safeguards agreement between the United States and the kingdom. The waiver report said that agreement applies extra verification measures to enrichment, conversion, fuel fabrication and reprocessing, and that the IAEA “would have the necessary tools” to do its work.
Why it has stalled
Two sources told CNN the war with Iran has played a part in the delay. Trump has said that war was launched partly to stop Tehran from using its enriched uranium to build weapons. One source said some on Capitol Hill also suspect the administration is holding back because a bipartisan disapproval resolution could block the deals from taking effect.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has previously threatened to build his own nuclear weapons if Iran acquires the bomb, CNN noted.
The argument over the Additional Protocol
The 2009 agreement between the United States and the United Arab Emirates is the benchmark. The UAE accepted enhanced IAEA oversight and promised to forgo enrichment and reprocessing, and nuclear experts call that deal the “gold standard.”
Kelsey Davenport of the Arms Control Association said the Additional Protocol was designed to give the IAEA more access “after it became clear that (basic) comprehensive safeguards agreements were insufficient.” She also warned that “bespoke” safeguards arrangements could invite Russia and China to strike similar bilateral deals with other countries. “How would the United States feel if Russia started pushing its own bilateral safeguards in lieu of more intrusive IAEA standards?” she asked.
Andrea Stricker of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies argued that without the protocol, the agency would have fewer rights to inspect suspected undeclared sites. She said there is no safe way to allow enrichment on Saudi soil, even under American control. “You can’t be sure that the Saudis would not try to nationalize a facility,” she said.
Not every expert shares the alarm. Dan Joyner, a law professor at the University of Alabama, said he does not see the missing protocol as “by itself, cause for alarm.” He called the bilateral agreement a reasonable supplement to Saudi Arabia’s existing IAEA safeguards, though its adequacy depends on terms that remain unpublished. Joyner also pointed to a commercial upside for the American nuclear industry, and to the risk that Russia or China would offer Riyadh looser terms.
