Nuclear Developments in the GCC: Risks and Trends

{
  "authors": [
    "George Perkovich"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}

In The Media

Nuclear Developments in the GCC: Risks and Trends

In the Gulf Yearbook 2007-2008, George Perkovich discusses what is publicly known about GCC intentions and capabilities to acquire nuclear technology and explores how the development a GCC nuclear program would balance Iran's growing power.

By George Perkovich

Published on May 1, 2008

Source: Gulf Research Center

The GCC states wish to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Any GCC project inevitably must contract with an established international vendor(s). Potential international suppliers will favor states in which risks of legal liability, economic turmoil, proliferation and political instability are lowest. They would insist on the GCC states' adopting the Additional Protocol. GCC efforts to build local uranium enrichment or plutonium reprocessing facilities could threaten cooperation.

Developing a GCC nuclear program is one way to "do something" to balance Iran's growing power. The phrase "nuclear program" is usefully ambiguous. In material terms, it is extremely difficult to imagine the GCC collectively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons capabilities to deter Iran. The effects of a GCC "nuclear program" will be ambiguous and muddled, at least for the 10-15 years it would take to develop basic capabilities. Competition for Arab leadership could give nuclear programs in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other GCC states, and perhaps Algeria, momentum independent of developments in Iran.

If faced with a nuclear-armed Iran, GCC states also would be tempted to rely even more intensively on US protection, which is a double-edged sword. Wanting to multiply their options, Saudi Arabia and the UAE recently have embraced closer defense ties with resurgent Russia. Ultimately, the GCC will mix tactics of balancing and potentially confronting Iran with diplomatic entreaties to encourage Iranian goodwill.

This article was originally published by the Gulf Research Center.

Nuclear Policy Middle East Iran

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Paper
Escalation Dynamics Under the Nuclear Shadow—India’s Approach
An exploration into how India and Pakistan have perceived each other’s manipulations, or lack thereof, of their nuclear arsenals.
Rakesh Sood
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
For Putin, Increasing Russia’s Nuclear Threat Matters More Than the Triad’s Modernization
For Putin, upgrading Russia’s nuclear forces was a secondary goal. The main aim was to gain an advantage over the West, including by strengthening the nuclear threat on all fronts. That made growth in missile arsenals and a new arms race inevitable.
Maxim Starchak
Paper
A Quarter Century of Nuclear South Asia: Nuclear Noise, Signalling, and the Risk of Escalation in India-Pakistan Crises
A close study of five crises makes clear that Cold War logic doesn’t apply to the South Asia nuclear powers.
Moeed Yusuf, Rizwan Zeb
Commentary
Emissary
The United States Should Apply the Arab Spring’s Lessons to Its Iran Response
The uprisings showed that foreign military intervention rarely produced democratic breakthroughs.
Amr Hamzawy, Sarah Yerkes
Commentary
Sada
Sub-Saharan African Migrants in Morocco: Security Concerns and the Test of Human Rights
Is Morocco’s migration policy protecting Sub-Saharan African migrants or managing them for political and security ends? This article unpacks the gaps, the risks, and the paths toward real rights-based integration.
Soufiane Elgoumri

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Paper

Escalation Dynamics Under the Nuclear Shadow—India’s Approach

An exploration into how India and Pakistan have perceived each other’s manipulations, or lack thereof, of their nuclear arsenals.

Rakesh Sood

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

For Putin, Increasing Russia’s Nuclear Threat Matters More Than the Triad’s Modernization

For Putin, upgrading Russia’s nuclear forces was a secondary goal. The main aim was to gain an advantage over the West, including by strengthening the nuclear threat on all fronts. That made growth in missile arsenals and a new arms race inevitable.

Maxim Starchak

Paper

A Quarter Century of Nuclear South Asia: Nuclear Noise, Signalling, and the Risk of Escalation in India-Pakistan Crises

A close study of five crises makes clear that Cold War logic doesn’t apply to the South Asia nuclear powers.

Moeed Yusuf, Rizwan Zeb

Stack of Iranian newspapers featuring Trump's face and a burning American flag

Commentary

Emissary

The United States Should Apply the Arab Spring’s Lessons to Its Iran Response

The uprisings showed that foreign military intervention rarely produced democratic breakthroughs.

Amr Hamzawy, Sarah Yerkes

Commentary

Sada

Sub-Saharan African Migrants in Morocco: Security Concerns and the Test of Human Rights

Is Morocco’s migration policy protecting Sub-Saharan African migrants or managing them for political and security ends? This article unpacks the gaps, the risks, and the paths toward real rights-based integration.

Soufiane Elgoumri