Saudi Arabia considers its own nuclear options after Iran deal

[bananas]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/21/us-iran-nuclear-saudi-nuclear-idUSKCN0PV1GC20150721

Saudi Arabia considers its own nuclear options after Iran deal
RIYADH | By Angus McDowall
Tue Jul 21, 2015 9:12am EDT

One likely Saudi Arabian response to the deal its biggest enemy Iran has struck with world powers is to accelerate its own nuclear power plans, creating an atomic infrastructure it could, one day, seek to weaponize.

<snip>

"I think Saudi Arabia would seriously try to get the bomb if Iran did. It's just like India and Pakistan. The Pakistanis said for years they didn't want one, but when India got it, so did they," said Jamal Khashoggi, head of a Saudi news channel owned by a prince.

<snip>

some Saudis close to the ruling family have also warned that if Iran still manages to weaponize its nuclear program, then the kingdom will have to follow suit despite the cost of becoming a pariah state and rupturing ties with the U.S.

Analysts who follow Saudi Arabia are divided as to whether it really does constitute a proliferation risk, given its newly assertive stance towards the U.S. and the life-and-death import it places on the struggle with Iran, or whether it is bluffing.

<snip>

What senior Saudis have consistently said about the Iranian nuclear deal is that they will demand exactly the same terms. That would allow them a nuclear fuel cycle that could produce material for a bomb, but would also impose a tough inspections regime.

<snip>

[leveymg]

1. The Saudis already have a nuclear program. It's called Pakistan.

Why would the Kingdom pay to reproduce a program they already funded after Bush, Sr. worked out a deal when he was CIA Director allowing AQ Khan network to proliferate? That deal was called, The Safari Club. Google it along with AQ Khan, or just go to: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/leveymg/280

[Fearless]

2. Because the US has a role in Pakistan today

The US government played a large role in securing nuclear material in the country during political unrest several years ago.

[leveymg]

3. KSA doesn't have to have physical custody to weild a credible deterrent by proxy.

The Saudis are still the largest source of support for Pakistani military programs, and the allegiance of the PAF Generals and ISI are very much to Riyadh, not Washington. We don't have the keys, they do.

[Fearless]

4. I agree. I said we have a role and they don't like it.

[leveymg]

5. Do you buy the argument that Iran is setting off some sort of regional nuclear arms race?

I don't. The significant other powers in the area already have a nuclear capability (of one sort or another), and they don't want Iran to gain parity. That's what this bluster is all about.