Trump said the discussions were “moving along” when questioned by reporters at the White House late Thursday, offering no further details. Tehran has separately indicated that an understanding with Muscat has been reached in principle, although outstanding legal and operational language still requires political approval.
Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said earlier this week that Iran and Oman had agreed on the broad framework governing navigation through the strait. State television subsequently cited a lawmaker as saying parliament was examining the final text and details before any arrangement could take effect.
The negotiations have acquired greater urgency because the Strait of Hormuz remains severely disrupted after months of confrontation involving Iran and the United States. Commercial vessels have faced attacks, restrictions and uncertainty over passage through a route that normally carries about a fifth of global oil supplies.
Washington expects an agreement between Iran and Oman to be announced soon and has linked its own response to implementation of the maritime provisions. The United States is prepared to lift its blockade of Iranian ports once commercial shipping can move through the strait without impediment, although any American measures would remain conditional on Tehran meeting its commitments.
The emerging arrangement represents an attempt to reconcile sharply different positions over control of the waterway. Iran has insisted that the security environment created by the conflict means navigation cannot simply return to the system that existed before fighting erupted. The United States has maintained that international commercial shipping must retain freedom of passage without discriminatory restrictions.
Earlier proposals exposed the extent of the disagreement. Oman had explored arrangements under which responsibility for shipping lanes would be divided between the two coastal states. Tehran rejected a proposal that it considered insufficient to address its security concerns and sought greater authority over traffic moving through waters adjoining its coast.
One version subsequently discussed would give Iran oversight of vessels entering the Gulf while Oman would handle outward traffic, although the precise division of responsibilities, security procedures and any maritime service charges have remained sensitive issues. Washington has opposed arrangements that could amount to Iranian control over international passage or compulsory tolls.
The discussions take place against continuing danger at sea. Shipping has not returned to pre-war levels, while attacks on commercial vessels have reinforced concern among shipowners, insurers and energy traders. The International Maritime Organization has documented dozens of attacks against international shipping in and around the strait since the conflict began on February 28.
Energy markets have closely followed the negotiations because disruption at Hormuz has increased transport costs and contributed to higher fuel prices. Any durable reopening would ease pressure on oil and gas flows from Gulf producers, although shipping companies are likely to require security guarantees before restoring normal schedules.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said a ceasefire arrangement lasting between 30 and 60 days could be concluded within a short period and could help reopen the strait. He has also argued that Gulf energy exporters will accelerate investment in pipelines designed to reduce dependence on the chokepoint.
Diplomatic progress has nevertheless been accompanied by fresh American economic pressure. Washington imposed additional sanctions on financial networks accused of helping Tehran move oil revenues and evade existing restrictions, signalling that negotiations over Hormuz are not being treated as a broader normalisation of relations.
Political divisions inside Iran remain another obstacle. President Masoud Pezeshkian and officials involved in diplomacy have defended engagement aimed at reducing economic and military pressure, while hardline lawmakers and security-linked factions have warned against concessions that could weaken Tehran’s strategic leverage.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf have also faced pressure from groups opposed to compromising with Washington. Iranian officials have repeatedly stressed that negotiations with Oman concern maritime arrangements and should not be interpreted as acceptance of American demands.
Tehran’s position has been shaped by its view that control over maritime security gives it significant negotiating leverage. At the same time, prolonged disruption has created economic costs for Iran itself, including restrictions on exports and access to its ports.
Follow Arabian Post
Select Arabian Post as your preferred source on Google and MSN News for trusted business news and Arab politics and updates.
