**Recent congressional opposition and procedural delays around the July 2026 U.S.-Saudi 123 agreement explain the heavy trader skepticism that it will enter into force before year-end.** The agreement, signed by U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, was transmitted to Congress in late August for the Atomic Energy Act’s mandatory 90-day review. Democratic Senators Jeff Merkley and Ed Markey introduced a joint resolution of disapproval on October 15, 2026, forcing a Senate vote after the November midterms. The deal omits the longstanding “gold standard” restrictions on uranium enrichment and spent-fuel reprocessing, relies on a bilateral safeguards arrangement rather than the IAEA Additional Protocol, and includes a two-year study on possible domestic enrichment—raising bipartisan nonproliferation concerns about regional arms-race risks. President Trump has tied implementation to Saudi normalization with Israel via the Abraham Accords, a condition absent from the text. Congressional recesses, the midterm calendar, and the possibility that the review clock resets with the new Congress in January further complicate timely entry into force. These verified developments—opposition measures, safeguard gaps, linkage to separate diplomacy, and calendar constraints—support the current trader consensus reflected in the 90.5% “No” probability.