UpFront – July 24, 2026

Make those donations at KPFA.org. Good morning. It's Friday, July 24th, 2026. This... is on front. I'm Brian Edwards Tigger. On today's show, Donald Trump has found one theocratic autocracy on the Persian Gulf with nuclear aspirations that he thinks he can work with, Saudi Arabia. On Tuesday, he signed a deal to help Saudi develop a nuclear program. Most notably and controversially, the deal allows for Saudi Arabia to enrich its own uranium, which, remember, is the election that allegedly prompted Donald Trump to go to war with Iran. Reportedly, the deal does not allow for expanded inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. We will start our coverage with Amar Hanjan, an energy lawyer who serves on the board of the Quincy Institute to talk about Saudi's geopolitics. Then we'll go to Edwin Lyman from the Union of Concerned Scientists to talk about the alarm bells going off in non-proliferation circles. That's all next. After the news. I'm Sharon Sabota with these KPFA news headlines. The Israeli military has shot and killed four Palestinians in the village of Tal in the northern West Bank. This incident has raised tensions in the occupied territory after an Israeli settler was killed in a confrontation with local residents. Health officials reported that two other Israelis and four more Palestinians were injured. The Israeli military announced plans for an extensive counter-terror operation in the West Bank. The exact circumstances remain unclear, but reports suggest a group of settlers intertale and were confronted by residents. The situation escalated leading to the fatalities. A series of explosions sounded near a military base hosting U.S. forces in northern Iraq, and sirens rang out in Bahrain early this morning. That came hours after the American military said it finished its 13th night of strikes against Iran. The conflict has flared again over the past week as the U.S. has pounded Iran while Tehran has attacked ships in the Strait of Hormuz and targeted U.S. assets and allies in the region. People around the world are feeling the ripple effects of the war on Iran. KPFA's Amelia Gordon has more. on the way it's impacting some families in Nigeria. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world's oil passed before the war, sent a ripple effect across the world.

A worldwide fuel shock drove up the prices of everything from gas and groceries to fertilizer and airline tickets. Fuel prices in Nigeria jumped from 58 cents per liter in February to a dollar in April, with an after effect on the prices of food and necessities. Shahe Aminu, a Nigerian father of six, says his 18-month-old was diagnosed with malnutrition in April. His family's economic struggles grew worse when he lost his job as a taxi driver, a victim of high gasoline prices caused by the war in Iran. Life used to be good. I worked as a driver and drove a vehicle on higher purchase, making regular payments to the owner. Whenever I returned home, I was able to provide for my family, and we always had enough to eat. But things began to change towards the end of last year. Then, early this year, due to an increase in fuel price, I could no longer keep up with my financial obligations. I now struggled to provide for my family. I had three children in an Islamic school, but I couldn't afford to pay their fees so they had to drop out. When I wake up every morning, it pains me to see my family because I can no longer provide for them the way I used to. For KPFA, I'm Amina Gordon. Tens of thousands of people in Spain and southern France have evacuated their homes while multiple wildfires rage out of control. Spain's government has declared a national emergency after multiple wildfires forced the evacuation of some 20,000 people in the central region of Madrid. France's Interior Minister Laurent Nunes said 63,000 people had been evacuated as a precautionary measure to protect residents from the ongoing wildfires. Spain and France both asked fellow European Union members for help. President Trump's latest set of tariff hikes have provoked heated objections from America's trading partners. The administration... Late on Thursday announced extra tariffs of 10% to 12.5% on 60 countries. Trump says they failed to adequately enforce a ban on goods made with forced labor. Australian trade minister Don Farrell has slammed them as unjustified. New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says the U.S. has not given meaningful evidence to support the allegations against dozens of countries, accounting for 99% of products imported into the U.S. Japan's chief government spokesperson says the move was regrettable. The new tariffs took effect just as Trump's temporary 10% worldwide tariffs expired at 1201 today. A House Judiciary Subcommittee held a hearing regarding conditions and protests at the Delaney Hall Ice Detention Center in Newark, New Jersey on Wednesday. KPFA's Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Quelo has more. House Republicans are accusing Democrats of creating false narratives around conditions in the Delaney Hall Ice Detention Center.

Republican Jefferson Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey opened a hearing on the Oversight Subcommittee Wednesday. He accused the detained immigrants of being ungrateful for what he called excellent conditions better than American prisons. And he accused Democrats of taking the side of immigrants over Americans. Jeff Van Drew said that the conditions can't be as bad as the detainees and their advocates claim. Because if they were, they'd leave. Everybody has the option to self-deport. They will be helped if they want to self-deport. They want to leave. It's not good. They don't like the food. They don't like the housing. They don't like the recreation. I didn't even go into, by the way, the soccer fields. I didn't go into the gym that is better than, and I, you know, I try to hit the gym every day, and I've been in a few nice gyms for many, many years. And this was up to any of them. Any of them anywhere that I've seen. So why the false narratives? Why would anybody do this? Ranking member Jasmine Crockett of Texas called out Republicans for refusing to call in any actual officials involved with Delaney Hall. The chairman has not called anyone from the company to testify before this subcommittee, which is not surprising because they're pouring millions of dollars into Republican campaigns across the country. The Democrats on the committee demand greater access into Delaney Hall, specifically for unannounced visits to see what the conditions are day to day. For KPFA News, I'm Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Cuello. The Minnesota man who killed Democratic state lawmaker Melissa Hortman and her husband has been sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison. JD Vance Bolter was sentenced Thursday after survivors of the attack and family and friends of the victims spoke about the enduring trauma of that night and the loss. Boltoner pleaded guilty last month in the June 2025 fatal shooting of the former House Speaker and her husband, Mark. The 59-year-old also pleaded guilty of attacking Senator John Hoffman and his wife, Evette. Bolter avoids the death penalty with his plea. And the weather, in the San Francisco Bay Area, partly cloudy today with highs in the upper 60s, in Fresno, sunny and hot, with highs nearing 100 degrees. I'm Sharon Sabota. I'll have more headlines here again for you at 8 a.m. Just about in 708 in the morning. You're listening to Upfront. I'm Brian Edwards Teakert. This morning we're going to be covering the rather astonishing news that Donald Trump, who started a war to keep uranium enrichment from happening in a theocratic autocracy on the Persian Gulf,

has just signed a deal to help establish uranium enrichment and the theocratic autocracy on the Persian Gulf. On Tuesday, his administration announced the deal with Saudi Arabia, which is notably lacking in many of the safeguards meant to keep nuclear energy programs from being adapted to military uses. That's an issue that we're going to get to in the second half of this program. We want to start with geopolitics and Saudi Arabia. Our guest is Amarhanjani. He's an energy lawyer, a former honors program attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice, currently serving as a board member at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. Thanks very much for speaking to us. Nice to be with you. Go-nighters. I was hoping you could start by trying to help us understand this from Saudi Arabia's point of view. My understanding is they are not particularly lacking in other energy resources. Why does a country with a virtually limitless supply of hydrocarbons and the best locations in the world to site solar panels want an expensive domestic nuclear energy program? Well, it's actually a question that has been percolating amongst energy analysts and policy specialists and high echelons the U.S. government for 30 years as it relates to Iran. The real answer is because they can because having a nuclear energy program gives a certain amount of prestige and power. to a state, and they look around and they see Israel having a program, a clandestine program, but everyone knows Israel has, you know, a very rich and deep nuclear program, no pun intended, as well as, you know, nuclear capable warheads. And they also see Iran that is... has a certainly has a domestic program obviously that they're being attacked for their right to enrich amongst other things so they see which way the wind is blowing and they view to reach reaching the upper echelons of becoming a middle to great power is having some sort of nuclear program. And so therefore, that's something that they want. Other countries want it to. And it will allow them to export more of their oil and gas as well, because nuclear power will be able to make up some of their domestic power needs. A lot of their domestic power needs, depending on how many plants they build, and they'll be able to export more. What did they do to get this agreement out of the Trump administration? I wish I had that answer for you. That seems the Trump administration doesn't operate in a very transparent manner, as I'm sure you and your listeners know. Jared Kushner is paid essentially by Saudi Arabia, you know, as a manager of Saudi funds.

that the agreement is not clear. What we do know is that it is not the gold standard agreement. By the gold standard, I mean, there's a, the gold center is what the UAE signed with the US called the 123 agreement, which for people who are concerned about proliferation, they would, you know, be essentially buying their fuel and once they process the fuel, shipping it out. This agreement, as has been commentated on by those who have seen it, allow Saudi Arabia to have domestic enrichment capabilities. And we're at war right now with Iran because we don't want them to have the right to domestically enrich Iranian. So that's a very interesting question, one that hopefully we'll get some answers to in the near future. Saudi Arabia does have some amount of uranium resources in its own soil. Is that right? They have some reserves. Those reserves need to be explored and processed. But yes, they do have some reserves. I believe as part of this agreement, if more reserves are found and they're deemed to be commercial, the U.S. would exert some control over those reserves.

Got it. So we're going to get into the proliferation concerns with our next guest. I'm really trying to understand the regional politics. And I know Saudis had nuclear aspirations for a long time for the reasons you articulated. But I'm curious how you think the war with Iran and the stalemate that the U.S. has kind of landed in have changed or accelerated those aspirations. I think they've only accelerated it because I think Saudi Arabia and much of the Arab states of the Persian Gulf have been under the U.S. security umbrella for the last 50 years. Actually, Saudi Arabia even more than that. And I think that security umbrella is being put to the test, and they're seeing that having U.S. bases and U.S. troops on their soil, in fact, makes them a target. it doesn't grant them some immunity from Iran or other states that wish to do them harm. So I think, you know, as these middle powers, you know, in Saudi Arabia and Iran are ostensibly middle powers in the 21st century as they evolve, they see this dynamic at play. I mean, Iran every night is hitting U.S. bases. launching missiles at U.S. troops and at the Gulf states that host them. I think they see that they need to start hedge it and start diversifying their security architecture and also rely on a bit of indigenous capability because, you know, the U.S. could be there today but not there tomorrow. You know, Donald Trump has done up. not just his first term, but certainly his second term as well, has made U.S. allies and partners scratch their heads and wonder, does the U.S. really want to still be around and help with our collective security? The answer is, we don't really know. He muses about getting out of NATO. He muses about, you know, leaving bases in East Asia. So, you know. you see which way the wind is blowing, you're going to want to hedge and having nuclear power is a powerful hedge. One of the most remarkable things about this announcement is that, publicly at least, there was like no pro quo attached to the quid. After the deal was signed, Donald Trump announced he wanted Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with Israel. And the response from the Saudis was basically too late. Your signature is already on the document. What do we think is driving the Trump administration to cut this deal right now? Donald Trump says and tweets a lot of things, which, as we know, as in throughout his public life, turn out to be untrue and they have very little effect on what actually ends up happening. I think most countries, most normal countries, you know, they go with what. the actual text of the agreement says. And if the text of the agreement says that it doesn't make, makes no mention of recognition of, you know, Israel or joining the Abraham Accords, you know, the Saudis will just shrug their shoulders and say, you know, we're going to go with what the agreement says. We don't really care what Trump tweets. He tweets a lot of nonsense all day. I think that to your question, the heart of your question, what is the quid?

to the quo, I think it's U.S. content and U.S. control, whereby, you know, having an indigenous nuclear program costs a lot of money. You're going to need... There are only a few countries in the world that have this technology, the U.S. being one of them. Although we haven't built a nuclear power plant in the United States for over 40 years. That seems to be changing now with the AI Data Center revolution. But he wants to make sure that it's U.S. firms that are going to get those contracts. It's U.S. scientists that are going to be there managing and overseeing that program. That's my guess. And he doesn't really care so much about proliferation as long as it's the U.S. that has sort of its hand to the tilt, so to speak. My impression, and I'm far from an expert, is that. Outside of this agreement, Saudi has been signaling increasing independence from the United States, denied use of its airspace when the United States was trying to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz. It publicly rebuffed this push by the Trump administration to pressure them into the Abraham Accords. It wasn't even like weasel words, like we'll talk about that later.

Do you think the basic power dynamics between Saudi and the U.S. are changing? I think at some level there's been changed, and it's been ongoing since the First Trump administration. If you recall, the first Trump administration, Iran launched a pretty audacious attack on Saudi Iranco in 2019 that took 30% of Saudi capacity offline for almost a year. production capacity. Trump, the administration didn't really do much to respond to it. Saudi Arabia had a, went through a sort of a rapproch from with Iran, not brokered by the U.S. or Europe, but by China. 30 years ago, Saudi Arabia was a huge supplier of U.S. energy resources. Now, very little Saudi oil comes to the U.S. All of that oil, or most of it, 80% of it goes to Asia. Their largest trading partner of every Gulf state, including Iran, is China. So that evolution has been ongoing for the last 20, 25 years. And I think where what made the Saudis realize, It cannot be business as usual, is how effective Iran was in targeting Saudi and Gulf Arab states with their missiles and drones and telling them, we're targeting you because you're allowing U.S. bases, U.S. troops and U.S. hardware on your soil to target us. So instead of those bases and troops being a deterrent for us, They're actually an accelerator for us to hit you. And I think Saudi then, you know, realize that if they're going to, you know, they're going to have to live with Iran for the rest of time, right? They're their neighbor. Whatever that looks like, whatever Iran emerges from this, they have to have some sort of ability to mollify Iran's concerns. And part of that is not allowing the U.S. to... essentially used their country as a launching path for offensive operations against Surlin. At the same time, Saudi... effectively broke its ceasefire with Ansarala, with the Houthi forces in Yemen, by firing on the tarmac of the airport in Sana'a when a flight was coming in from Iran. That has triggered the Ansarala blockade of ships going to and from Saudi ports in the Red Sea through the Babel Mandab Strait. It seems to be pointing in the exact opposite direction, like a willful escalation of the conflict to a new front. How do you make sense of that? You know, I think, you know, the Saudis certainly, sorry, the Fouthis certainly have interests aligned with Iran on a number of fronts, but there are actually independent players that have their own politics and their own concerns. I think that.

It's interesting, this blockade that they put into place, it's being selectively enforced. They're allowing Chinese vessels and Chinese cargoes to go through. They're not allowing, you know, European cargoes to go through. I think it's the message of the Saudis that, you know, you've got to sort of take our interest into consideration right now. And if you want to open up that, so to speak, candid worms and start attacking us, then there are going to be consequences. I think it's much more regional, but it's a much more regional issue between the Saudis and the Houthis. There is an Iranian dimension to it, of course. But this, that blockade or partial blockade, so to speak, that's taken effect is more as a result of... the Saudis hitting that airport and the deterioration of relations between the Houthis and the Saudis and it has to do with Iran and what's happening with Iran. But hitting the airport was a choice and a choice with a predictable outcome. Maybe they couldn't have predicted the specific form of retaliation, but retaliation is a predictable consequence of acts of war. It is. It is. And I think, you know, just judging by the direction of the tea leaves, so to speak, it seems like we're headed for a dramatic escalation in the region because the Trump administration seemingly wants to break your odd and thinks that by doubling down on the use of force that they're going to get their way on the Straits of Form moves. make Iran capitulate on a member of other issues. And part of that dimension also is on the Houthis. And they're trying to get the Saudis on board to pressure the Houthis as well. So, you know, this is, you know, they're placing their bet that this is going to work. And the Saudis, in turn, have to think about, you know, where they want to place their bet. If it's any indication, as you said, hitting that airport is a sign of the... with the direction of the wind is flowing at the moment. Finally, the big international concern over the terms of this deal between the Trump administration and Saudi Arabia is the potential it creates for a nuclear weapons breakout in Saudi. As far as we can tell, the reporting's a little ambiguous on this, Saudi hasn't signed on to expanded international energy. atomic energy agency inspections, which would be typical of an agreement to expand a civilian nuclear energy program. And they'd be building a domestic uranium refining capacity up. I'm just kind of curious, politically, outside of an inspections regime and treaty obligations, do you think there are political or regional political restraints on Saudi pursuing a nuclear weapons breakout?

Yeah, I think that that is always going to be a concern moving forward. Now, this deal hasn't seen the light of day yet, so we can't really examine it and have proliferation experts look at it and see what the details are. But any time a country has domestic enrichment capabilities or develops domestic enrichment capabilities and is not a party to. the nonproliferation regime, then yes, this is always going to be a concern that it can be, once you have the know-how, once you have the capacity to enrich and you have the scientists on the ground and you have the technical expertise that you can always divert and build a... a nuclear weapon, have a nuclear weapons program. India did this, Pakistan did this, North Korea did this. Iran is yet to do it, but I'd be surprised if they didn't do it after being attacked twice. Because, you know, essentially what we've seen is having a program like this in some ways makes you immune from being attacked. Once you build a nuclear weapon, I mean, North Korea... is a menace to the world. Every so often they launch missiles into the direction of Japan and then off the shores of South Korea. We really can't do much about it because we know if we do it, you know, there we go Seoul. And so right now, think about Russia and Ukraine. I mean, Russia has invaded a sovereign state. You know, we're doing some things about it, but we can't go all out. The only sovereign state in the world to voluntarily give up its nuclear weapons stockpile. Correct. Yeah. And look what happened to them. And then, and look at Libya too. Libya Gaddafi gave up his, his weapons program. And, you know, look what happened to him. You know, a horrible dictator, no doubt. But, you know, countries look at, look at. history and they see what's the direction that's going and having a program like this and being able to build nuclear weapons gives you a certain level of immunity. I mean, if Iran actually had a nuclear weapon, I doubt that Israel, the United States would be attacking it twice in the span of a year. All right. Amarhan, Johnny, we got to leave it there. Thank you so much for speaking to us. It's a pleasure to be with you. Amar Hanjani is an energy lawyer. He's a former honors program attorney at the U.S. Department of Justice, currently serving as a board member at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. That takes us to 728, which means I have slightly aired. We're in the midst of a very abbreviated push to raise money for this radio station. And I would be breathing a lot easier if I had wrapped that interview up five minutes ago to ask for your money.

We already set ourselves back this morning by deciding that we would cover the news and nothing but the news. I have set us back further by asking a couple too many questions to Amr, and we're going to be sticking with news coverage in the second half of this program. This is a problem because I started this hour confronted by a note saying that we have just been asked to make the largest challenge that has been put up during this fun drive. Buy a lot. Glenda in Novado. Wow. Glenda in Novado is offering to double $2,400 if we can raise $2,400 to match her. Luckily, I'll be carrying coverage into a special during the next hour of KPFA, so I am not stuck with just the 31 minutes remaining in this one, but $2,400 is a lot to raise under any circumstances. If you appreciate the hard-hitting coverage and analysis that we bring you on this radio station, we try to dive into the root causes of the things you only experience as headlines and other media. And we are asking you to give quickly and generously at KPFA.org or 1-800-439-5732. Right now, we are on track to end this fund drive two days earlier than we would most years. If we are able to post strong fundraising results today, it will be in time to end the fund drive three days earlier. which would be an incredibly encouraging development for all of us here at KPFA. That starts with making this $2,400 challenge at KPFA.org or 1-800-439-5732. I don't have any thank you gifts in particular to dangle in front of you. If you like to shop around, you can go to kpFA.org or you can just make it as big a gift as you can. To be the first one to count towards that challenge and say the thank you gift is the coverage on KPFA. Whatever you do, our fate's in your hands. KPFA.org is the place to donate. 1-800-439-5732. I'll let you know how we're doing right after news headlines, and then we'll talk to Edwin Lyman from the Union of Concerned Scientists. He's their director of nuclear power safety. That's next. After the news. I'm Sharon Sabota with these KPFA news headlines. A 27-year-old Ecuadoran woman has been detained by immigration agents while boarding a flight from Denver to Oakland. Plain clothes officers arrested Chantal Morales Rojas on a jetway at Denver International Airport Sunday night. The incident has been shared widely on social media. Ice is here. Help us! Help us! Alicia Dan Singer, a Bay Area resident, traveled on the same flight and witnessed the arrest. She says an unidentified man first approached Rojas at the gate and questioned her about her visa.

They scanned our boarding passes and they went fine, but all of a sudden, an alarm went off on the Southwest computer. And the Southwest agent started yelling and said, you have to come back. But then two large men sort of rushed us into the jetway and someone pushed the door closed behind us. Video recorded by Dansko reportedly shows several people forcing Rojas down an exterior stairway and into a Homeland Security van parked on the tarmac. ICE says Rojas overstayed her visa and remains in custody, but her attorney, Laura Lichter, says Rojas entered the country legally, followed the rules and filed an immigration application, allowing her to remain in the United States while her case was pending. Rojas works as a software developer in Oakland. She's now being held at an ICE detention facility in Aurora, Colorado. Kern County hospitals have been relying in part on the care of doctors from around the world. Dr. Lola Oldamiji is among them. She's a Nigerian-born internist who came to Bakersfield in 2012 and has not left. A year ago, she opened a primary care clinic in McFarland, a small, largely farm community north of Bakersfield, because so few clinics and providers serve the area. Her patients travel there from Delano, Wasco, Shafta, Los Hills, and even outside of Kern County. But recent decisions from Washington, D.C., brought home the extent of Kern County's dependence on globally trained doctors and exposed the county's vulnerability. Various Trump policies, including the forthcoming intention of the Trump administration, to make it more difficult for immigrants to obtain green cards, could impact the Kern County medical system. 16 rural hospitals in California. are at risk of closure. That's according to a report from the Center for Healthcare Quality and Payment Reform. The report says California has had two rural hospitals closed since 2015. The state still has 59 open rural inpatient hospitals and 22 hospitals have cut or lost services. Many other states are reportedly faring even worse than California. and the weather. In the San Francisco Bay Area, partly cloudy today with highs in the upper 60s. In Fresno, sunny and hot with highs during 100 degrees. In Los Angeles, mostly sunny today with highs in the mid-80s. I'm Sharon Sabota. I'll have more headlines here for you again at 8 a.m. Just before 7.34 in the morning, the show is up front. My name's Brian Edwards-Teker. Before we move on to our next guest, a very quick fundraising update. We have not yet recorded a single donation towards the $2,400 challenge fund that I announced a few minutes ago. It is the largest challenge we have faced by far. It comes during a morning where we're doing straight news, not coverage that is designed to maximize fundraising. If you care about the work we do, and in particular, the news coverage we do. Help! KBFA.org, 1,800, 439 5732. All right, we're going to pick up with our coverage of the deal that was announced between the United States and Saudi Arabia for development of a nuclear energy program and talk about it in terms of its theoretical risks of nuclear proliferation.

We haven't seen the text of the agreement yet. It is not public. But according to the reporting on the contents, there are two pretty remarkable features coming out of a U.S. government that is in the midst of a war it started, allegedly because of a uranium enrichment program and a theocratic autocracy on the Persian Gulf. That is, firstly, that under this program, Saudi Arabia is going to develop... domestic uranium enrichment capacity. And secondarily, it does not appear to have signed on to the kind of expanded inspections regime with the International Atomic Energy Agency that has typically accompanied such above-board nuclear energy development programs. Joining us to talk about this is Edwin Lyman. He's a physicist and the Director for Nuclear Power Safety with the Union of Concerned Scientists, where he specializes in nuclear proliferation, nuclear terrorism, and nuclear power safety. Thanks very much for joining us. Thank you. Good morning. What do you understand about the kind of program and the kind of nuclear power plants Saudi wants? Well, I think that a big part of the U.S. motivation for this deal is to market U.S. reactor technology abroad. And the U.S. is not being very successful right now in carrying out President Trump's demand that we increase nuclear power rapidly here. So the companies are looking to find foreign... buyers for this technology. And one of the technologies is the Westinghouse AP 1000. That's a... a light water reactor of what's considered evolutionary design. And there are two operating here in the United States in the state of Georgia where they famously ended up costing more than twice the original estimated cost and taking more than twice as long to build as originally estimated. So utilities in the U.S. are not. particularly interested in spending money on these reactors. And so Westinghouse is looking for trying to export this reactor, but without a nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia, they can't sell it. So does Westinghouse have like a particularly well-equipped lobbying operation to secure this kind of a favor from the Trump administration? I assume that You know, it's, yeah, I don't personally know about Westinghouse's own lobbying, but certainly the nuclear industry.

on the whole, has been very effective in changing the conversation about nuclear power in the United States over the last decade or more, to the extent that there's massive bipartisan support in Congress for a whole range of legislation, other efforts to support nuclear power. We have this incredibly pro-nuclear power administration, and we have a public who's forgotten. about the nuclear disasters of the past like Fukushima or Chernobyl, and so is more receptive to the idea of nuclear power today. And that's due in large part the nuclear industry lobbying. Let's start with safety concerns before we get into proliferation concerns. If we take it at face value that this is a deal purely about a civilian nuclear energy program, what concerns would you have about building AT-1,000 reactors in a country that is periodically being bombed by one of its neighbors? Yes, there's no question that the Middle East is a volatile place today, and the potential for a nuclear disaster in the region already exists. The United Arab Emirates does have operating nuclear reactors that have even been targeted to some extent, and we've seen that... civilian nuclear power plants can become the targets of military operations. We've seen that in Ukraine, the Zopper Asian nuclear power plant, which was taken over during the Russian invasion of 2022, and has made people more aware that of the potential... hazard that a civilian nuclear power plant could cause if it's targeted in a military operation. And no nuclear power plant operating today was designed to withstand a military assault, either from ballistic missiles or even from the more capable drones that are being deployed today. And the AP-1000 is no exception. In fact, it has a containment and a shield building which are less robust. than other types of nuclear power plants that are operating around the world. And so without extensive modification to that design to harden it against military attacks, I would be concerned that that would certainly be seen as a potential target by Saudi Arabia's enemies in the future. Then on to the proliferation concerns. First of all, what would be the typical or the gold standard measures to ensure a civilian nuclear energy program doesn't get adapted to military use?

Well, one of the important considerations is whether a country has the right to develop its own domestic fuel cycle facilities, and that means either uranium enrichment or spent nuclear fuel reprocessing. Without having indigenous enrichment, a country would not be able to produce uranium. at higher levels of enrichment that could potentially be used in nuclear weapons. And without a spent fuel reprocessing plant, the country would be unable to separate plutonium, which is, of course, another of the ingredient that can be used to make nuclear weapons. So in some of the nuclear cooperation agreements that the U.S. has concluded, specifically with regard to the UAE, In that agreement, the country foreswore its option to have domestic enrichment reprocessing. That is what's regards the gold standard. Now, in the context of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman made very clear that he is... he would be interested in developing nuclear weapon if Iran did so, and therefore he's already declared his intent to proliferate depending on, you know, the circumstances. And so to enable a country like Saudi Arabia to have domestic uranium enrichment, when it's already declared its potential interest in proliferating is a... is certainly one example where you should not be giving that authority, but that is what reportedly the U.S. Saudi agreement that was signed opened the door to. The public reports say that there would be a two-year study of the issue before actually allowing Saudi Arabia to go forward with enrichment, but again, we don't have the text, as you pointed out. I guess like an interesting distinction between Saudi and Iran is that to have an effective nuclear weapon Iran would not only need to enrich uranium to like 90%. and design a warhead, but it would also need to design and test a delivery system. They don't have an Air Force to speak of. Saudi has fifth generation U.S. F-35 fighter jets. They could put a warhead on a bomb. They don't have to build an elaborate ballistic missile that can deliver a heavy payload. Yes, that... They could open up the opportunity for different types of delivery systems and therefore reduce the constraints on the designs of the nuclear weapons that the Saudis might be able to use if they did proliferate. But yes, I mean, any...

There are several different components for a country that wants to develop nuclear weapons. One, it needs the fissionable material. And I'd point out that you don't need to enrich uranium to 90% to be able to use it in a nuclear weapon. A highly enriched uranium is defined as uranium enriched above, or 20% or above, and all highly enriched uranium is generally accepted to be weapon usable. And even at levels below 20%, with a type of uranium that's called HALU or high assay low enriched uranium, it is potentially possible to build nuclear weapons. But as the enrichment goes down, the constraints on that weapon become greater because they become heavier and harder to deploy, but not impossible. But in addition to having the fissionable material and a nuclear weapon design that you have confidence in, you also need a means of delivering it. And that could be through, again, and any of the options that Saudi Arabia has available, including fighter jets, but also ground-based delivery systems are all as a possibility as well. So, like, what is Saudi Arabia's relationship to the nonproliferation treaty? Are they a signatory? They are. So even though they don't have any nuclear facilities as a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, they are committed that if they want to develop nuclear power, they would need a safeguards agreement for the International Atomic Energy Agents. And that would be separate from whatever agreement they have with the United States to develop their nuclear energy program? That's correct. You know, Saudi Arabia does not need, you know, nuclear, U.S. nuclear technology. It could buy from a number of other countries. But in any case, as an NPT signatory, it would need to negotiate that safeguards agreement with the IA. Now the U.S., sorry, the U.S. agreement could have additional constraints that Saudi Arabia would have to accept in its negotiation with the IA, but again, we don't know what those are yet. Sorry. That does raise an interesting question, the fact that they could theoretically shop around for nuclear reactor technology. If you were looking at the places with a track record of building nuclear power plants recently and on budget, You wouldn't look to the United States and Westinghouse. Why do you think they wound up in a deal with Donald Trump? Yes, that's correct. In fact, I think the U.S. industry feels like it has a chip on its shoulder and always raises the specter of the Russians or the Chinese as our competitors in the international nuclear market. And they use that argument to justify the U.S.

government doing everything possible to give the domestic industry a leg up because they're worried about these competitors. I mean, in reality, although, yes, it's true that China and Russia have been exporting nuclear reactors to other countries, it's still at a relatively small scale, and those are on extremely generous financing terms on the part of the exporting countries. But the danger here is that if the US feels... It has to compete with these other countries that it's sort of a race to the bottom that if those other countries don't impose significant nonproliferation security standards on their exports, then there's an argument in the U.S. that we need to lower our own standards or won't be able to compete. And that's a dangerous dynamic. And the only cure for that is to have stronger international standards for safeguards and security. and safety, by the way, most of which are lacking in the international space. All right. Edwin Lyman, we're going to have to leave it there. Thank you so much for speaking to us. Thank you. I appreciate it. Edwin Lyman is a physicist and the director of nuclear power safety with the Union of Concerned Scientists, where he specializes in nuclear proliferation, nuclear terrorism, and nuclear power safety. That takes us to 749 in the morning. The show is up front. My name is Brian Edwards Teakert, and that leaves me just barely over 10 minutes to ask for your help and your support of this radio station. You know, every day we make a decision about what we're going to put on the air the next morning. And when that decision happens during Fund Drive, we have to do this kind of elaborate balancing act because we have a playbook. We have figured out what it takes to maximize our fundraising dollars at KPFA. And generally, what that requires is building an hour's coverage around something we can offer is a thank you gift. No. That's let us lift up the work of a lot of authors doing great things in the world, but it almost invariably points away from covering the week's news. I am very cognizant of the fact that this radio station was founded in 1949. in the shadows of hiroshima and nagasaki in a world that had been newly introduced to the menace of the nuclear age to the new found capacity of humanity

to extirpate itself and possibly all life on Earth. And for me, when I thought about how we weighed our principles against our self-preservation, it became a very easy editorial decision. To the extent that we can bring some depth, some analysis, and some insight to understanding what it means that our government has just signed a uranium enrichment deal with Saudi Arabia, We should put that first and foremost. What that means, however, is that over the first 50 minutes of this hour, we have raised a grand total of two donations. Two donations during morning trivedime, the single most important time of the broadcast schedule in radio, and the single most important time for us in terms of fundraising. And we have raised a grand total of two donations. On the morning, when we were handed the largest challenge fund that has been offered to the station, $2,400. So if you care about this place, and in particular, if you care about the way that we cover the news, We are asking you to come to KPFA's rescue at KPFA.org or 1-800-439 5732. Nine minutes left. You do a couple of things when you donate right now. First and foremost, you make sure KPFA can pay the bills. Second, you make your donation go further. If we can make that challenge fund, if we can turn 2,400 into 4,800, we have raised a lot of money for KPFA. We have put us on track to shorten our summer fund drive still further. Third, you are sending a signal to those of us working here that there is a way. to stay relevant to what's happening in the news, to do the kind of coverage that KPFA was founded for while still raising the money it takes to sustain this radio station. It all comes down to what you are willing to do to support the place you spend your mornings with. So I'm looking for the first phone caller. of our home stretch at 1-800-439-5732. We're looking for people who can give through our website over whatever screen you have available to you at www.kfa.org. There is our first caller. And we are in particular looking for sustaining donors, people who sign up to make a regular monthly contribution to put us on firmer footing in the months and years ahead, which we expect to be very rocky for every kind of institution. that harbors some kind of dissent, particularly ones like us. We are a broadcast operation that interfaces with several federal agencies who regulate us and are currently controlled by political appointees of the Trump administration. Join that call around the line. KPFA.org, 1-800-439-5732. That's 1-800-Hey-KPFA.A. Seven minutes to go. And again...

This is a massive challenge. Yesterday, we struggled, we made it, but we struggled to make a $1,200 challenge. Today, the challenge amount is $2,400. And because of the room we made for news coverage, I have to compress most of our fundraising into the final 10 minutes of the program. Three of those 10 minutes are gone. If you appreciate having more coverage and less fundraising, if you appreciate having coverage that is relevant to the moment. If you think a place like KPFA should exist in this world, a place where we can roam from what's happening in City Hall, to the geopolitics of the Saudi pursuit of nuclear energy and potentially nuclear weapons and what it means for the nonproliferation regime that has kept the world from going up in a ball of fire for the past three quarters of a century. Then we are asking you to join the now two callers that we have on the line. at kpfa.org or what 800 4395732 that's one 800 hey kpfa i will tell you this um you know i i i work at kpfa this is what i do for a living i also give to kpf i'm i'm a monthly sustainer sometimes i make one-time gifts when i am so moved And it is my job and an occupational hazard that I wake up before sunrise every morning, turn on a screen, and expose myself to the latest news developments concerning some of the most horrifying and terrifying developments in the world. And one of the things that that can do to you is make you cynical or despondent or hopeless or numb. which is the very worst thing to have happened to a people in a world desperately in need of change. And I think it's important to find things, even when there are very small things, that we can do to make a difference. Supporting KPFA, supporting community institutions, supporting... places that are the foundation of a healthy democracy and the potential for change is one of those things we do have control over where we can make an intervention where we can actually build something good in this world. All it takes is two minutes out of your morning to give right now, to give while we have a chance to make the donation go further because of this massive $2,400 challenge. We've just had two web donations come in online, and they have three web donations come in online now, and they have recorded our first $219 towards our challenge at KPFA.org, 1-800-439-5732. That is 1-800.

Hey, KPFA. If you care about this place, if you think there should be a KPFA in this world, it is a matter of necessity. You know, KPFA only works if everyone chips in. If you recognize that a gift to KPFA is not a payment for a private service like cable or your cell phone data plan, but in fact, a gift to a greater good, a gift to everyone else who counts on KPFA, an act of solidarity with everyone who's already given. Then we need your help at KPFA.org or 1-800-439-5732. The beauty and the, and frankly, the terror of KPFA is that it's a collective action, which means it's a collective action problem. Everyone who's already given to this place is taking a leap of faith that enough other people will join them, that together will sustain something bigger than any of us could on our own. They are doing it for you, and we are asking you to do it for them. Evelyn in El Cerrito has just moved us a lot closer. We're now at $719 raised towards that $2,400 challenge and down to three minutes in this hour to close the gap. KPFA.org, 1-800-439-5732. The best place to donate is the website. When you donate through the website, there's a comments form. You can send me a note. I would love to read it on the air. Michael in Cherryland said, I would like everyone to act their age. I am not going to tell you the amount he donated, but I expect that is his age. Evelyn and El Cerrito wrote, I appreciate all the news coverage and music and all the contributes to our well-being. Thank you all at KPFA.A. Anonymous in Berkeley wrote, thank you for the nuclear deal coverage. I appreciate it during Pledge, Pledge, page,000, 57532. You hear me rattle off names like this. I am very cognizant of the fact that I will never at KPFA have to tell you. This program was brought to you by Walmart or Westinghouse or Lockheed Martin or Exxon. The only names I read off are only sponsors and they are your neighbors. Your colleagues, your comrades, your fellow listeners, they are the people who are only already nobly freely giving of their own money so that KPFA can be here for you. And we are asking you to join them to help us meet the challenge by donating at KPFA.org or 1-800-439-5732. Thanks to an anonymous donation from Sonoma. We are now at $819 raised. Two callers on the line who have not yet had their donations added to the tally. Now at $919 raise, thanks to Angela in Sonoma. That means we have $1,481.

left to raise to make this $2,400 challenge at KPFA.org or 1-800-439-5732. There is a fourth thing that you accomplish if you donate, particularly during this challenge period. We are in the midst of a very ambitious effort to shrink the length of our fund drive, starting with this one. Our development staff worked really hard between our last fun drive and this one to raise money from people directly off air. so that we could lower the goal for this fund drive in hopes of ending it two or three days earlier than we normally would. Right now, we're on track to end two days earlier. We want to go for three days early. And if we make this $2,400 challenge, we have a shot at it. That comes down to you. And that is an enormous gift to everyone who loves KPFA. But not all of the fundraising.kfa.org, 1,800 4395732. That's 1,800, Hey, KPFAFA. I got to take care of regulatory compliance.