Merkley and Markey introduce resolution to block U.S.-Saudi deal

In the latest update in the ongoing pushback to the proposed civil nuclear cooperation agreement between the United States and Saudia Arabia, Sens. Jeff Merkley (D., Ore.) and Edward Markey (D., Mass.) have officially introduced a Joint Resolution of Disapproval (JRD) in an effort to block the deal from going into effect.

The background: On July 22, the Department of Energy announced that Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Minister of Energy Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman had signed a 123 Agreement. Named after and required by section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act, these agreements establish a legal framework for any significant nondefense nuclear cooperation between the United States and another country. According to the State Department, the U.S. government currently has 26 123 Agreements in force, covering 50 countries, Taiwan, and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

At the time of the deal's signing, Wright said, "Rest assured, these agreements uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and nonproliferation while relying on the world's best nuclear technology and scientists, designed right here in the United States."

Despite this assurance, many voices in the ensuing months have expressed concerns about the details of the deal, especially on the point of enrichment. A full explanation of the enrichment portion of the agreement has already been explored by Nuclear News. In short, the deal would open the door for Saudi Arabia to domestically enrich uranium up to 5 percent U-235 and possibly raise that threshold to less than 20 percent U-235 later on.

This arrangement stands in sharp contrast to the 123 Agreement between the United States and the United Arab Emirates in 2009. When the UAE entered into its deal, it agreed to forego any domestic enrichment or reprocessing. Such a commitment is generally referred to today as the "gold standard" for 123 Agreements.

The first JRD: On September 17, four Democrats in the House of Representatives-Gregory Meeks (N.Y.), Brad Sherman (Calif.), John Garamendi (Calif.), and Don Beyer (Va.)-introduced a JRD on the U.S.-Saudi 123 Agreement to the House.

A press release from the four congressmen said the deal "dangerously departs from decades of nonproliferation standards and presents considerable risks." Specifically, it noted two major points of contention: the deal's departure from the "gold standard" commitment, and the lack of the Additional Protocol.

The Additional Protocol is an agreement which significantly increases the IAEA's ability to verify the peaceful use of all nuclear materials in a country. According to the agency, the agreement is currently in force with 144 states and Euratom.

In September, IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi responded to these concerns. While he acknowledged that the Additional Protocol is the "ideal setup for safeguards because it gives us more access," he also said that "there are a number of countries which don't have Additional Protocols." He added that the United States, Saudi Arabia, and the IAEA are in the process of developing other agreements that would ultimately give the IAEA "authorizations and capacities which are very similar to those that you may find in an Additional Protocol."

The second JRD: On October 15, Merkley and Markey announced the introduction of a nearly identical JRD in the Senate. The legislators similarly marked the lack of the "gold standard" and the Additional Protocol as unacceptable and further highlighted that Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman previously has said that his country will develop a nuclear weapon if Iran acquires one. According to their joint press release, despite public reporting indicating that the deal would hinge on the normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel, no such arrangement is formalized in the agreement's text.

For the passage of both JRDs, the clock is now ticking. According to the resolutions, the 123 Agreement was submitted to Congress on September 14. Per section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act, this submittal set off a 90-day review period that is split into 30 days of review in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee and 60 days of review in the general Senate.

If Congress does not pass its JRDs within that window, the agreement will go into effect. The resolutions will also require a supermajority to overcome the president's ability to veto their passage.

In the Senate, according to Merkley and Markey, the JRD will be voted on after November 29.