US firm Westinghouse Electric Company will reportedly be one of the companies helping develop Saudi Arabia's nuclear sector following a potential deal with the US, according to CBS News, the BBC's US partner.

When asked to confirm this, Westinghouse provided the BBC with the following statement from its CEO Dan Sumner:

"The US Government’s announcement to launch a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia is a landmark step that strengthens energy security, expands opportunities for US industry and workers, and drives significant long-term economic growth and investment benefits for both countries."

Critics in Congress don't appear to have the votes to block this dealpublished at 22:36 BST

22:36 BST

Daniel Bush
Washington correspondent

The deal has some short-term benefits for Saudi Arabia: closer ties to the US during a period of tension over the war in Iran, and a clear signal to the rest of the region that it remains a key power in the Middle East.

For the US, the deal gives America a leg up in the competition with China and Russia to develop civilian nuclear infrastructure in the region.

China had sought to reach a similar deal with Saudi Arabia. Russia has already built nuclear facilities in Egypt and Turkey.

We've not seen the full detail yet, but Trump will face criticism at home if critics believe it has given Saudi Arabia access to nuclear technology without strict guardrails to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons down the line.

The deal will likely face opposition in Congress, but it appears lawmakers don’t have the votes needed to block Trump from putting the agreement in place.

This deal is a major victory for Saudi Arabiapublished at 22:32 BST

22:32 BST

Daniel Bush
Washington correspondent

The nuclear deal is a major victory for Saudi Arabia that has the potential to reshape power dynamics in the Middle East - though not immediately and perhaps not for several years, if not longer.

Saudi Arabia has pushed for access to American nuclear technology since the George W Bush presidency.

The effort intensified in recent years - led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has looked to diversify the kingdom’s economy while strengthening relations with the US under Trump.

But it will likely take at least a decade for Saudi Arabia to bring civilian nuclear power plants online, according to energy experts.

And while Israel and other critics have warned that the deal could pave the way for Saudi Arabia to develop nuclear weapons, analysts said if Saudi Arabia goes down that path it would also take years to make a military nuclear programme fully operational.

Are fears Saudi could seek nuclear weapon justified?published at 22:26 BST

22:26 BST

Frank Gardner
Security correspondent

Will the Saudis now seek a nuclear bomb?

No. At least, not as things stand today. But that is the fear that inevitably surrounds this deal. Iran enriched its own uranium and look what happened there.

Deep below its desert mountains, out of sight of prying US satellites, the Islamic Republic went ahead and enriched 441kg of uranium to 60% purity, far beyond the 3.67% needed for civil nuclear power and only a short step away from the weapons-grade Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) needed to build a bomb.

That HEU is thought to be still down in the tunnels where it was bombed last year in the US Operation Midnight Hammer.

There is nothing to suggest Saudi Arabia has any intention of doing the same as Iran, or of diverting its nascent civil nuclear programme towards a military purpose.

But the Saudis live in a dangerous neighbourhood and if Iran were to acquire a nuclear weapon then they would want one of their own as a deterrent.

Yet far more likely than going through the long, laborious and illegal process of enriching their uranium to 90% and then making that into a warhead they could, in theory, simply buy the bomb ‘off the shelf’ from their ally, Pakistan.

Image source, Getty Images

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the two deals signed with Saudi Arabia uphold the "highest standards of nuclear safety and nonproliferation".

"These agreements reflect our two nations' shared commitment to strengthening US-Saudi commercial relations, delivering prosperity at home and security to our allies abroad," he says in a statement released by the energy department.

"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.

"Thanks to President Trump, the American nuclear renaissance is underway."

More now from the US Department of Energy announcement.

It says the deals signed with Saudi Arabia lay the "legal foundation" for a "decades long, multi-billion dollar partnership".

The department says a "peaceful nuclear co-operation agreement" will provide "great access" for US firms in the Saudi nuclear energy programme.

The deal includes two agreements, it says, a "peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement" and a "bilateral safeguards agreement".

It also says it will "reinforce global nonproliferation standards".

"The agreement will now be transmitted to Congress for review," it adds.

The US has just announced a nuclear energy deal with Saudi Arabia.

US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright and Saudi Minister of Energy His Royal Highness Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman signed a peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement alongside an accompanying bilateral safeguards agreement, the US Department of Energy says.

We're reading through the announcement and will bring you more details shortly.

Middle East expert Rosemary Kelanic says it's "quite shocking" that the US is potentially signing a deal that will allow Saudi Arabia to have facilities to enrich uranium.

She references reported details of the deal, including the prospects that it may contain "potential co-operation" in building uranium enrichment facilities within Saudi territory.

"The US has never done that before, we have never helped another country enrich on their own soil," she tells the BBC.

She says the reason for this is that "if you can produce your own nuclear fuel, you become a much bigger risk" for building nuclear weapons.

A reminder: The deal has not been officially announced and any precise details are not yet confirmed, but there have been mutliple reports in US media about what it contains.

Image source, Getty Images

Energy sector expert Bob McNally says it is "always a win" when a "major country" like Saudi Arabia choses to partner with the US to develop its nuclear sector.

The world needs "reliable, always on, ideally emissions-free" energy, especially in the "AI era", says McNally, who is also a former member of George W Bush's National Security Council.

He's asked if there are security risks in helping a country on the other side of the world develop nuclear capabilities, and McNally tells the BBC: "I don’t think it’s a great one."

"I think we have a good record of working with countries to responsibility develop their nuclear sectors," he adds.

"I’m much more concerned about a regime like Tehran obtaining nuclear weapons… than I would be about the UAE or Saudi Arabia, responsible and friendly allies."

Saudi-US deal different to US's typical nuclear energy agreementspublished at 20:59 BST

20:59 BST

Gary O'Donoghue
Chief North America correspondent

This looks set to be a 30-year deal between the US and Saudi Arabia, to build civil nuclear capacity, potentially bringing in tens of billions of dollars for US firms.

But it's a different kind of deal to traditional US commercial nuclear agreements.

What is being widely reported is that Saudi Arabia might not be subject to the normal "gold standards" the US has previously demanded of partner countries in terms of inspections and, in particular, the non-enrichment of uranium on the host country's soil.

So, this is a different kind of deal that the US is proposing, and the reason they are pushing for it - particularly now - is that Russia and China have been knocking on the door and the US simply did not want to miss out.

It's a deal that’s been in the offing for some time - the Biden administration had pursued something similar; though that deal had been tied to Saudi Arabia normalising relations with Israel.

That link seems now to have been dropped by the Trump White House.

There's been no formal announcement yet, but when it comes, expect Israel to express its displeasure.

Image source, Reuters

US President Donald Trump has just started speaking at a high school in Atlanta, Georgia.

We're listening in to see if he is speaks about the reported US-Saudi Arabia nuclear deal, and will bring you any relevant updates.

Image source, Getty Images

If you're just joining us, we're still expecting the US and Saudi Arabia to announce an nuclear power deal.

US media has reported that the two countries have reached a commercial agreement for US companies to run nuclear power plants on Saudi Arabian soil, but we've not had anything yet on the matter from President Trump or Saudi officials.

Reports suggest the deal will potentially allow Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium itself.

It would be the latest milestone in a Saudi-US negotiations on nuclear that have been ongoing ever since the two nations signed an memorandum of understanding in 2008.

Back in the US, Democrat representative John Garamendi described the deal as "terrible, terrible policy", while Republican Marlin Stutzman said he had no "initial" concerns over the agreement.

The highly controversial agreement will need to be debated in congress but opponents are unlikely to be able to gather enough votes to defeat Trump's initiative, our North America editor Sarah Smith writes.

We expect Trump to soon be speaking at a high school in Atlanta, Georgia, for an unrelated event, but we will bring you any relevant lines.

Stick with us, and we'll provide updates on any breaking news as soon as it occurs.

Image source, Reuters

Nuclear is one of the key issues at stake between the US and Iran in the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

At the end of February, in the midst of ongoing US-Iran nuclear talks, the US and Israel launched a bombing campaign on Tehran, which responded by launching missiles and drones to American Gulf allies.

The conflict resulted in Iran effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's busiest oil shipping channels, and the US blockading Iranian ports.

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly said the US is seeking to destroy Iran's ballistic missile capabilities and its ability to develop nuclear weapons - Iran has consistently maintained its nuclear activities are entirely peaceful.

The two countries signed a Memorandum of Understanding in June to halt military operations and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, including a commitment from both sides to further talks to reach a final agreement and a promise from Iran that it "shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons".

But three weeks after it was signed, Trump declared the ceasefire "over" and the countries have since been exchanging strikes again.

Today the president threatened that the US would destroy Iran's bridges and power plants if attacks on Hormuz persist while Tehran warned the US against targeting its nuclear facilities.

Nir Barkat, Israel’s minister of economy, says Israel "can manage it" if Saudi Arabia has nuclear power for peaceful means.

"If they want it for peaceful purposes - we can manage it. The Americans do not want to endanger Israel. Netanyahu and Trump know how to maneuver without taking risks," he tells Israeli military radio.

Israeli heritage minister Amichay Eliyahu says Israel will do "as much as [it] can" to ensure no Middle Eastern country develops a nuclear weapon.

"Saudi Arabia today is in a good direction, [but] tomorrow it could reverse on us," Eliyahu tells Israeli public broadcaster Kan.

But former Israeli defence and foreign minister, Avigor Liberman, is urging the Israeli government to "act decisively" to halt the deal.

"Saudi Arabia’s civilian nuclear program will ultimately result in nuclear weapons," Liberman wrote on X earlier today, adding that this would lead to a "mad arms race throughout the entire Middle East."

For context: Israel is widely believed to have nuclear weapons, but it neither confirms nor denies whether this is the case.

Image source, Reuters

William Patey, former British ambassador to Saudi Arabia, says he thinks Saudi Arabia is not interested in nuclear weapons unless "Iran was to acquire them".

Speaking to BBC News, he says the country has been clear "over the years" that were Iran to get nuclear weapons, it would "seek to do the same".

"They have a genuine need for civilian nuclear power," he says, adding that Saudi Arabia uses a "tremendous" amount of its own oil and gas to generate electricity and they are seeking to reduce this dependence.

"The US is their preferred source" for this nuclear technology, he adds.

America appears to have "conceded quite a bit", Patey says, referencing reports the US could allow for the Saudis to enrich uranium themselves.

Patey says he is not sure why any such concessions would have been made, but speculates it may be a commercial choice as the Saudi's could cut a deal with China or other countries instead.

Image source, The Washington Post via Getty Images

Brad Sherman, Democrat representative from California, says the US should only approve a deal if it has the the "same gold-standard safeguards as our deal with the UAE".

Under that deal in 2009, the UAE does not produce its own uranium.

"A President waging war to prevent nuclear proliferation in the Middle East should not facilitate proliferation just because US companies stand to make a profit," Sherman writes on X.

Republican representative Marlin Stutzman tells CNN that he has no "initial" concerns with the agreement, but would want to "hear more intelligence".

"You know, the Saudis are really the stable balance in the Middle East", he says, describing Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salmana a "friend" of the West and America.

Also speaking to CNN, Democrat John Garamendi describes the deal as "terrible, terrible policy", adding that "we should never, ever do this".

"Enriched uranium can be made into a nuclear weapon. This is really, really bad, bad policy," he says.

Opponents of Trump's deal are unlikely to defeat itpublished at 18:40 BST

18:40 BST

Sarah Smith
North America editor

Image source, Reuters

The nuclear deal is a commercial agreement for US companies to run nuclear power plants in Saudi Arabia rather than giving the technology to the country.

A nuclear deal of this kind has been under discussion for years. It was envisaged as part of a wider agreement that would include Saudi diplomatic recognition of Israel.

But, according to reports, US President Donald Trump has not made that a condition of the deal. Instead, he has reportedly agreed that Saudi Arabia may be allowed to enrich uranium on their own soil, as well as accepting terms that could limit international inspectors from accessing nuclear sites in the country.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, on a visit to the Philippines, addressed concerns about the deal.

"Suffice it to say, the US is not going to reach any agreement with any country in the world that leads to the risk of proliferation," he said.

A similar deal with the United Arab Emirates, in 2009, was much more restrictive with stringent inspections and no right to produce its own nuclear fuel.

The highly controversial agreement will need to be debated in congress but opponents are unlikely to be able to gather enough votes to defeat President Trump's initiative.

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader, has said that he would seek to build nuclear weapons if Iran does so.

The deal set to be announced by the US and Saudi Arabia relates to the generation of nuclear energy - not weapons.

But as we've been reporting, some opponents of the deal fear it could lead to nuclear proliferation - the spread of nuclear weapons to more countries.

Currently only nine countries are known to have nuclear weapons. This count includes Israel, which is widely believed to have them, but does not confirm or deny possessing nuclear weapons.

Lisa Lambert
Live reporter

When the first reports of the deal started emerging, a nuclear nonproliferation expert at the national security think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies warned it would be "bad".

"Congress should block it," Andrea Stricker, posted on X.

"If it does not, one hopes the policy will be reversed by a subsequent administration before too much damage is done in terms of watering down safeguards, setting negative precedents for other states, and failing to contain the spread of enrichment and reprocessing—which we just put back in the box in Iran via force," she added.

Stricker called the 2009 deal with Saudi Arabia's neighbour, the United Arab Emirates - in which the UAE does not produce its own fuel and accepts a host of other restrictions - "the gold standard", and warned that the agreement to be announced would "demolish" that standard.

Some fear this deal could trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle Eastpublished at 17:59 BST

17:59 BST

Frank Gardner
Security correspondent

Image source, Maxar

This deal is controversial.

The reason why the US is doing this is two-fold. It has a commercial interest, because American firms are going to make money out of it.

But partly it's to keep Saudi Arabia within its strategic sphere of interest.

The United Arab Emirates got the South Koreans to help them in this area, as well as the US.

If Washington turned down a Saudi request for help with their civil nuclear programme then the Saudis could turn to the Chinese to help them.

Saudi Arabia already has a nascent civil nuclear programme, and its big regional rival just across the Gulf is the Islamic Republic of Iran which, as we know, has a very advanced one.

This deal comes as a war is raging nearby in the Gulf and many countries are saying to Iran, you can't enrich your own uranium or you can't be trusted to.

The fear is that if Saudi Arabia starts enriching its own uranium, that could just encourage hardliners in Iran to secretly race to build a bomb.

It could also, potentially, trigger a nuclear arms race in the region with Egypt and Turkey stepping up their own programmes.