U.S.-U.A.E. Nuclear Cooperation Agreement: The Poisoned Chalice President Bush Left Behind

Five days before President Obama was sworn into office, the outgoing president left him with a policy imbroglio of potentially staggering dimensions. Without meaningful consultation with the incoming administration, Bush signed a nuclear cooperation agreement with the United Arab Emirates saddling the Obama administration with a critical policy issue that, in the nation's interest, would best have been left to the new administration's determination and timing.

Bush, as usual, marching to his own obdurate drummer, defiantly ignored significant congressional pushback on the deal. According to CNN, many in congress were and are seriously concerned that the agreement could spark an arms race prompting nuclear proliferation in the region. It did not go unnoticed that Iran was one of the U.A.E.'s largest trading partners, with the Port of Dubai being a key transit point for sensitive technology bound for Iran. This, while simultaneously having been one of the major hubs for the nuclear black market network run by Pakistani nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. Khan has admitted clandestinely spreading nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea among others.

The Bush administration defended its actions by pointing out that the U.A.E. had committed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and had donated $10 million to establish an International Atomic Energy Agency international fuel bank. Of course one is too polite to mention that for the U.A.E. with its billions of oil income, $10 million is significantly less than pocket change, like leaving a nickel tip at Joe's Diner for a breakfast of scrambled eggs, hash fries, coffee and orange juice with the whole wheat toast well done.

The nuclear cooperation bill needs be sent to Congress for ratification. To date, President Obama has not signed off on the bill in spite of having been put in a position, by President Bush's actions, whereby not doing so would create a separate set of problematic issues.

To complicate the situation even further is the release of a tape submitted in a federal civil law suit filed in Houston. It shows an individual being brutally tortured by Sheikh Issa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, a member of Abu Dhabi's royal family. The 45 minute tape captures the victim being beaten, given electric shocks, and crushed by a car. According to the Times of London, "Jim McGovern, the democratic co-chair of the congressional Human Rights Commission, viewed the tape and said it was one of the most horrific things I have ever seen in my life." Only the other day, under pressure from Human Rights Watch, and responding to international public revulsion, the Emirati Public Prosecution has launched a criminal investigation. Previously, the government's policy had been to stonewall the issue with a glib declaration that the matter had been "resolved privately."

Senior U.S. officials well understand the uneasiness of U.S. lawmakers concerned that the United States would commit the nation to nuclear cooperation with a country where the rule of law is not respected and human rights violations are tolerated.

Other concerns have lingered. At the time of signing of the treaty, that is during the last days of the Bush administration, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, then the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs committee, introduced legislation to block the agreement unless the U.A.E. took remedial action, commenting that "serious concerns remain regarding the U.A.E.'s efforts to combat money laundering and terrorist financing as well as the effectiveness of their export control system."

As with all matters in the region, big dollars are at stake, or at least what we thought to be big dollars before the age of TARP. The initial reactor work will range around $20 billion. Both GE and Westinghouse, according to the Wall Street Journal ("Arab State Launches Nuclear Bid," April 2, 2009), are among the firms seeking contracts. Certainly their voices will be heard as well. How it all plays out remains to be seen. One is prompted once again to paraphrase Lenin: "The last capitalist will sell us the rope that hangs him," but sort of on a somewhat larger scale.

Comments

[edgraham]

The list continues to grow.

Why did we put up with Bush's anti-American agenda for eight years?

[SamEllison]

I'd be willing to bet the the UAE made a very substantial donation to the Bush Library.
Quid pro quo!

[lastpost]

"resolved privately."
There you are Mr. President. A new euphemism to excuse torture.
But you’d still have to be some sort of Barack-room lawyer. To demand accountability for their transgressors, yet immunity for your own.

[SiberianRat]

I don't know why the UAE always gets a pass--it's not the liberal bastion it sells itself as (I lived there from 1999-2004). It was one of only 3 countries to recognize the Taleban (and a lot of them live there), most of the 9/11 financing happened there, and people are still stoned to death in one of the emirates! The shiny outside picture of the UAE doesn't at all match the underlying reality.

[wonkguy]

Well, the U.S. being a singatory to the Geneva Convention and it having been made U.S. via ratification by Congress didn't stop Bush-Cheney from violating it. If we need to get out of this deal, I'm pretty sure a national security argument could be made.

[Kaviraj]

Well, if Bush was wanting to add to the axis of evil, he could not have chosen a better recipient. After all, the Saudis did 9/11, is it not? Fitting reward for those that helped him thrash the country.

[tsp999]

It worries me that some of the commentators on this grown-up issue do not actually appear to be aware that the UAE is not Saudi Arabia. It is near Saudi, but it is different in many important ways.

[tmm56]

Finally, while $10 million dollars is an insignificant portion of the total wealth for the UAE, that point is irrelevant. The concept of the IAEA's international fuel bank, in fact, is still under debate. Whether or not the fuel bank comes to fruition, the UAE will still have to purchase the fuel itself; the purpose of the proposed bank is to provide a safe and internationally cooperative platform to do so. The fact that the donation was given-- be it a small or large drop in the bucket-- evinces a just another of the many positive gestures made on the part of the Emirati government.

[tmm56]

While regional nuclear proliferation is a serious threat, the claims of this deal sparking an all out arms race are overly alarmist. The development of an Iranian weapon would surely have this effect. The future success of the UAE's pragmatic, transparent and multilateral approach to developing nuclear power for civilian use could set an example for the many other nuclear energy aspiring nations in the region to follow its lead. It is certainly naive to dismiss the proliferation risks involved, but it is equally as ungrounded to ignore the rights given these nations under the terms of the NPT.

As far as the issue of the torture case levied against a member of the UAE's royal family goes, the author fails to mention that this person has since been arrested and the incident is under state investigation. While it is fair to question how genuine the undertaking of the legal proceedings will be, it is certainly unfair to judge or label the UAE as a blantant violator of humna rights based solely on this case until the proceedings have run their course. This issue of torture in the US has no bearing here. The concerns of those in Congress such as Rep. Ilena Ros-Lehtinen (who it is relevant to note is an opponent of all nuclear power) and Sen. Markey center on the UAE commitment to security and international law, not the US'.

[Kaviraj]

tmm56 wrote:
"While regional nuclear proliferation is a serious threat, the claims of this deal sparking an all out arms race are overly alarmist. The development of an Iranian weapon would surely have this effect."

So if it is a so-called ally of the US there will not be an arms race and when Iran does it it will? What planet are you living on? Iran is a signatory to the NPT and as such cannot even engage in making a bomb - which it insists it is not doing.
Yet any Arab country that FACTUALLY GIVES NO RIGHTS TO WOMEN is not violating human rights? You got your head screwed on the wrong way an/or you are wearing rosy glasses.

[Elliott32]

The only country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons now started the arms race in that region. The only solution is a nuke-free zone for the Middle East. The entire region is a powder keg: A few countries with too much money from oil and too little human rights is a bad mix for peace.

[tmm56]

Since the discovery of the AQ Khan network, the UAE has made vast strides in improving these admittedly lax export regulations. While there is surely room for more progress, recent history as well as the the UAE's vocally expressed fear of an Iranian nulcear weapon indicate that its commitment to closing the spigot on Iran's illict procurement network is genuine. Only with all of these conditions met will the US even begin to fulfill its end of the bargain.

The transparency of the UAE's policy and willingness to open itself to intense international oversight and lack of enrichment and reprocessing capabilities precludes the majority of the security issues surrounding its nuclear program. The UAE is facing a looming energy crisis due to the depletion (and desire to profit from rather than burn its oil) of its oil reserves and massive expansion. Nuclear provides a sustainable way to meet this need, a need which has arisen from The UAE's economic sucess, not the government's economic failures and political antagonism as is the case in Iran. The UAE will get nuclear power whether the US assists or not, or involvement can only serve to increase security and decrease the likelihood of the diversion of nuclear technology for military purposes.

[Kaviraj]

Nuclear is not sustainable at all. The world has uranium reserves that last at best 40 years - then what?

[PatrickWalker]

Actually, with reprocessing it can go one for quite a while. Right now, "waste" is basically what went in by now 2% or so is impurity. Given market pricing, it's cheaper to mine new fuel than reprocess this.

I'm only a fan of nuclear power as a 1:1 replacement for coal and not to be used to fuel increased energy demand. The only global solution to climate change and broader health problems is REDUCTION. Everything I've been hearing from "green" proponents has the smell of "having your cake and eat it too." That is, you can feel morally superiour and yet maintain a grossly wasteful lifestyle.

I got sidetracked. Sorry.

[tmm56]

While all of the points raised in this article are certainly relevant and legitimate concerns, it fails in its narrow approach and detailed knowledge of what this deal actually entails.

The signing of the US-UAE 123 nuclear agreement wasn't simply a last minute action or "back door deal" intended to side step and undermine the policies of the incoming administration. Talks concerning cooperation with the UAE in developing nuclear power have been taking place openly for years. The US was the third of 4 countries (France, Britain, Japan) to sign such a deal. Prior to the 123 agreement (which was preceded by an MoU between the two), the UAE signed the IAEA Additional Protocols and published a white paper outlining its policies regarding peaceful nuclear power. In that April 2008 white paper, the UAE announced its intentions to forgo the right to domestically enrich uranium granted it by the NPT, an issue which has been at the hear of the Iranian nuclear debate and a pledge which removes the majority of the proliferation danger related to the transfer of nuclear technology.

The cooperation of the US with the UAE is conditional not only on this forfeiture of its enrichment cycle but also its agreement to international oversight, procure all fissile material from internationally sanctioned sources, continued commitment to the Proliferation Security Initiative and to tighten its current export laws.

[bronceye]

So they use enhanced interrogation? Well, there country hasn't been invaded and their oil people are filthy rich. Torture works, people. I'll bet chaney got a copy of those interrogation techniques for his personal pleasure.

[Realization]

One has to question how much opposition to this deal comes from supporters of Israel and not from real concerns for U.S. interests. Frankly, if we don't do it, others will and it gives us a better presence in the Gulf. Just do it carefully.

[hearmeout]

Your article fails to mention what is potentially one of those most crucial developments in the history of nuclear power: THORIUM. The U.A.E. is actively pursuing the development of thorium - as opposed to uranium - reactors. And nuclear power generated from thorium essentially refutes every element of the position you argue...

1.) The waste created by thorium reactors is not "weapons grade"; you can't make nuclear bombs from it.

2.) The "half-life" of such waste is considerably shorter than the waste generated by traditional nuclear reactors, which means that such waste need only be managed for thousands (as opposed to millions) of years.

3.) Certain models of thorium reactors can actually "burn" the stockpiles of dangerous waste that we've already accumulated, thus resolving the thorny storage problem we're wrestling with today.

4.) A thorium reactor can't melt down; no more Chernobyls or Three Mile Islands.

5.) Thorium is far more abundant than uranium and does not generate the greenhouse gases associated with fossil fuels.

The U.A.E. will get nuclear power, because if the U.S. won't help them there are plenty of countries that will. The wisest course of action is to steer them towards thorium-based reactors; then at least U.S. companies might benefit from what amounts to the inevitable.

[Robert Hargraves]

Yes, thorium is a very attractive energy source. I just gave my talk Aim High! again this morning. This tutorial presentation is at
http://rethinkingnuclearpower.googlepages.com/aimhigh

and more detailed information is at http://energyfromthorium.com

[JennyT]

The $10 mil is pocket change. I think this deal was a parting "thank you' gift for allowing the US to base military operations in Dubai. Heck, defense operations aside, there are certainly many US corporate and other institutional interests in Dubai as well. C'mon - its all about the bottom line -- that's all that mattered to the Bush-Cheney admin. As long as someone is getting richer, the ends justify the means ...

[Tena]

O. My. God.

"t I don't think the US can claim the moral high ground on torture. Human rights violations have also not prevented US nuclear cooperation with countries such as India."

Of course, you're right, but that doesn't make me feel any better about an agreement with the Saudis. S.A. is the Point of Origin for the Wahabists. Osama bin Laden, if he is still alive, is a Wahabist.

This is utter insanity and of course Commander CooCoo did this.

[tsp999]

I think it's worth pointing out that the UAE is not Saudi Arabia. Neither is it exactly like like Saudi Arabia.