WASHINGTON — A deal promoted as a gateway to peaceful nuclear energy is setting off alarms far beyond the Middle East, with one political scientist warning that President Donald Trump may have opened the door to a nightmare the world has spent decades trying to prevent.
Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, described the emerging U.S.-Saudi nuclear agreement as a “giant firestorm”—one that could place sensitive technology inside an already volatile region and encourage other governments to demand the same treatment.
The danger, Pape argued, is not confined to Saudi Arabia. It lies in what happens next.
“If you thought you couldn’t have made the situation worse, there was already a fire, and we’re already pouring gasoline on the fire,” Pape said during an appearance on The Court of History podcast on the Legal AF Network.
His warning followed the signing of a landmark civil nuclear cooperation agreement between Washington and Riyadh. The 30-year framework is intended to help Saudi Arabia build a commercial nuclear-energy industry with American technology.
But the agreement has generated intense scrutiny because it may permit future uranium enrichment inside the kingdom while omitting the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Additional Protocol—the enhanced inspection system designed to give monitors broader access to nuclear facilities.
The Associated Press reported that the arrangement includes a bilateral safeguards framework but does not contain the same restrictions accepted by the United Arab Emirates. Under that earlier “gold standard” agreement, the UAE renounced domestic enrichment and reprocessing, technologies that can support civilian energy but also create a pathway toward weapons-grade material.
Trump attempted to calm the controversy by declaring that there would be no Saudi enrichment and that the agreement would proceed only if Riyadh normalized relations with Israel by joining the Abraham Accords.
Yet that intervention appeared to deepen the confusion.
Reuters reported that Trump introduced the normalization condition after the agreement had been announced—and apparently without discussing it beforehand with Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who helped negotiate the deal.
Saudi Arabia has long resisted recognizing Israel without meaningful progress toward an independent Palestinian state. Riyadh has not publicly accepted Trump’s new condition.
Meanwhile, the complete agreement has not been released, leaving lawmakers and nonproliferation specialists confronting sharply conflicting messages: a signed framework that reportedly leaves enrichment open for further study, followed by a presidential statement insisting enrichment will not occur.
Pape’s assertion that the deal has raised Saudi Arabia’s chances of obtaining a nuclear weapon from 98% to “99.999%” was rhetorical analysis, not a documented statistical forecast. No public evidence shows that Riyadh has decided to build a bomb.
Nevertheless, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has previously said the kingdom would seek a nuclear weapon if Iran obtained one. That history makes any weakening of safeguards especially consequential.
Pape warned that allowing Saudi Arabia greater flexibility could erode the standards imposed on other American nuclear partners. The UAE could demand relief from its existing restrictions. Other governments could conclude that restraint brings fewer strategic benefits than developing their own enrichment capacity.
Then the pressure could spread beyond the Middle East.
“What does it mean for countries besides Iran?” Pape asked, raising the possibility that Ukraine, Poland and others living near powerful adversaries might reconsider their own nuclear options.
That scenario is not inevitable. Civil nuclear technology does not automatically produce a weapons program, and international inspections, congressional oversight and future negotiations could still add substantial safeguards. The agreement must undergo a congressional review before it can fully take effect.
The Trump administration argues that keeping American companies at the heart of Saudi Arabia’s nuclear program will provide Washington with influence that Russia or China would not offer. Supporters also say nuclear power could help the kingdom diversify its economy and reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.
Critics see a far more dangerous bargain: one that trades a longstanding nonproliferation standard for commercial access and uncertain diplomatic leverage.
For Trump, the agreement was supposed to pull Saudi Arabia closer to Israel and the United States. Pape fears it could produce the opposite—a region filled with suspicion, competing nuclear programs and pressure for an even deeper American military commitment.
The nightmare is not that one agreement instantly creates a weapon.
It is that one exception becomes a precedent, the precedent becomes a race—and, by the time world leaders recognize the fire spreading, it may be far harder to contain.