Trump’s Hormuz pledge meets Iranian caution

US President Donald Trump’s assertion that an interim agreement with Iran would be signed on Sunday and immediately reopen the Strait of Hormuz has exposed a widening gap between Washington’s public confidence and Tehran’s more guarded account of the negotiations.

Trump said in a social media post on Saturday that “the Deal is scheduled to get signed tomorrow” and that, once completed, the Hormuz Strait would be “OPEN TO ALL”. He also claimed that Iran “no longer wants a Nuclear weapon”, presenting the proposed arrangement as the first step towards ending months of fighting and restoring one of the world’s most important maritime corridors.

Tehran did not confirm Trump’s timetable. Foreign Ministry officials urged caution, saying no final decision had been taken and that the text still needed approval through Iran’s political and security channels. The contradiction left diplomats and energy traders watching whether Sunday would produce a formal signing, a looser statement of intent, or another delay in negotiations that have repeatedly moved close to agreement before stalling.

The immediate dispute centres on three issues: who manages the waterway after reopening, whether Iran can collect payments or transit fees from ships, and how quickly financial relief would be provided to the Islamic Republic. Washington wants unfettered navigation through the strait, while Tehran has sought arrangements giving it a supervisory role over traffic in waters it considers central to its security.

A draft framework under discussion is understood to include a halt to hostilities, reopening of the strait, the lifting of some restrictions affecting Iranian trade, and a 60-day negotiation period on nuclear issues. The most sensitive question remains the fate of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and the level of international access to nuclear sites damaged during the conflict. Trump has framed the draft as a firm barrier against an Iranian weapon, but the technical details appear unresolved.

Mediators from Qatar and Pakistan have intensified contacts with both sides, with Islamabad positioning itself as a key channel between Washington and Tehran. The idea of an electronic signing has been floated, reflecting the difficulty of arranging a public ceremony while military tensions persist. A formal document could still fall short of a comprehensive peace accord, functioning instead as a memorandum designed to freeze the conflict and open a longer bargaining phase.

The stakes are unusually high because the Strait of Hormuz handles a large share of global energy trade. Around 20 million barrels per day of oil moved through the waterway in 2024, roughly one-fifth of global petroleum liquids consumption. The route is also critical for liquefied natural gas, particularly cargoes from Qatar and the UAE, with no realistic alternative route for many volumes.

Oil markets have reacted sharply to every signal from the talks. Prices fell after Trump projected confidence in a deal, but the decline was limited by Iran’s refusal to confirm the Sunday signing and by doubts over whether ships could return quickly to normal passage. Energy traders remain concerned that even a signed agreement may require demining, naval coordination, insurance cover and guarantees against attacks before full commercial traffic resumes.

The conflict has already reshaped shipping behaviour across the Gulf. Tanker operators have faced higher insurance costs, altered routing plans and greater scrutiny from naval forces. Some cargoes have been delayed, while refiners in Asia have reviewed emergency supply options. Gulf exporters have pushed for a settlement that restores predictable access without creating a precedent for tolls or political control over an international chokepoint.

Iran’s internal politics add another layer of uncertainty. Hardline factions have criticised concessions that could be seen as surrendering leverage gained from the closure, while pragmatists argue that reopening the strait and securing financial relief would ease pressure on the economy. Any agreement signed by negotiators may still need to withstand domestic scrutiny from institutions close to the supreme leader and security establishment.

Washington also faces resistance from allies worried that a narrow Hormuz deal may leave wider regional conflicts unresolved. Israel has pressed for stronger guarantees on Iran’s nuclear programme and regional networks, while Gulf governments want de-escalation without giving Tehran authority over maritime flows. The draft does not appear to settle disputes linked to Lebanon or allied armed groups, leaving potential flashpoints outside the core text.