Reports of a civilian nuclear agreement between the United States and Saudi Arabia pose a strategic dilemma for Israel. If proven true, Jerusalem may find itself in the most problematic scenario from its perspective: a growing risk of regional nuclear proliferation, without the diplomatic achievement of normalization with the most important Arab state.
For years, it was clear that the Saudi nuclear program did not stand on its own, but rather was part of a broader regional deal. Washington was supposed to grant Riyadh civilian nuclear cooperation, and in return, Saudi Arabia would advance toward normalization with Israel. If this link is indeed severed, Israel could be left paying the price—without reaping the reward.
The issue is not the use of nuclear energy itself, but the possibility that Saudi Arabia will be permitted to enrich uranium. Such a precedent could undermine the UAE model—which was based on relinquishing enrichment—encouraging other countries in the region to demand similar rights and weakening the non-proliferation regime. Even if there is a clear difference between Iran and Saudi Arabia, nuclear infrastructure endures over time, while leaders and alliances change.
However, Israeli opposition should not be public. Israel would do better by engaging in discreet dialogue with the U.S. administration, aimed at reducing the risks through strict oversight, the adoption of the IAEA's Additional Protocol, and restrictions on enrichment. At the same time, Israel must recognize that if the US-Saudi deal is indeed advancing, it may be unstoppable—though it can still be shaped.
Rather than attempting to block the agreement, Israel should try to leverage it back into a broader regional deal. This means examining phased diplomatic steps, particularly in the Palestinian arena, that will allow Saudi Arabia to justify progress toward normalization. Mere opposition risks leaving Israel out of the game; active involvement could turn a problematic development into a strategic lever. If Washington is granting Riyadh such a significant strategic asset, Israel must ensure that it too emerges from the process with a strategic achievement—and not just the risks.
Reports of a civilian nuclear agreement between the United States and Saudi Arabia pose a strategic dilemma for Israel. If proven true, Jerusalem may find itself in the most problematic scenario from its perspective: a growing risk of regional nuclear proliferation, without the diplomatic achievement of normalization with the most important Arab state.
For years, it was clear that the Saudi nuclear program did not stand on its own, but rather was part of a broader regional deal. Washington was supposed to grant Riyadh civilian nuclear cooperation, and in return, Saudi Arabia would advance toward normalization with Israel. If this link is indeed severed, Israel could be left paying the price—without reaping the reward.
The issue is not the use of nuclear energy itself, but the possibility that Saudi Arabia will be permitted to enrich uranium. Such a precedent could undermine the UAE model—which was based on relinquishing enrichment—encouraging other countries in the region to demand similar rights and weakening the non-proliferation regime. Even if there is a clear difference between Iran and Saudi Arabia, nuclear infrastructure endures over time, while leaders and alliances change.
However, Israeli opposition should not be public. Israel would do better by engaging in discreet dialogue with the U.S. administration, aimed at reducing the risks through strict oversight, the adoption of the IAEA's Additional Protocol, and restrictions on enrichment. At the same time, Israel must recognize that if the US-Saudi deal is indeed advancing, it may be unstoppable—though it can still be shaped.
Rather than attempting to block the agreement, Israel should try to leverage it back into a broader regional deal. This means examining phased diplomatic steps, particularly in the Palestinian arena, that will allow Saudi Arabia to justify progress toward normalization. Mere opposition risks leaving Israel out of the game; active involvement could turn a problematic development into a strategic lever. If Washington is granting Riyadh such a significant strategic asset, Israel must ensure that it too emerges from the process with a strategic achievement—and not just the risks.