Hormuz, between negotiation and the threat of a new escalation
Iran and Oman are trying to establish new entry and exit routes for commercial and oil tankers, without the participation of the US
BeirutNegotiations to reopen the Strait of Hormuz are advancing, although the final details remain to be settled. Iran and Oman have moved closer on a new maritime route to re-establish transit through this strategic passage, while Washington and Tehran maintain indirect contacts to resolve the political obstacles that are still blocking a definitive reopening.
US President Donald Trump stated this week that it could be achieved "very soon" and affirmed that talks had made progress. From Tehran, authorities confirmed that negotiations with Oman have allowed the approval of the geographical coordinates for the new navigation route. The spokesperson for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Esmail Baghaei, explained that talks are focused on establishing "safe entry and exit maritime routes" that take into account the sovereign rights of Iran and Oman, as well as security concerns.
The negotiation between Tehran and Muscat focuses on how to guarantee the passage of ships through a strait shared by both countries, which has become one of the main focuses of international tension. The proposal on the table seeks to establish new entry and exit routes for commercial and oil tankers, with a mechanism that allows for the progressive recovery of navigation.
The reopening of the strait, however, does not depend solely on the understanding between Iran and Oman. Iranian authorities insist that passage will continue to be conditioned on the lifting of the US blockade on ports. An issue that keeps the indirect negotiation between Iran and the United States open.
Who will supervise maritime traffic?
One of the most sensitive points is who and how maritime traffic will be supervised. Some sources mentioned by international media point to a possible distribution of routes: ships entering the Persian Gulf would do so via a route under Iranian supervision, while the exit would be linked to a route under Omani control. The formula has not yet been officially confirmed and remains one of the most delicate aspects of the negotiation.
The issue of tariffs is also pending. Iran has raised the possibility of charging fees for ship transit, while Oman would advocate for a more limited formula. Washington, for its part, rejects any mandatory payment to use a maritime route that, before the crisis, functioned as an open international route.
The importance of the agreement goes far beyond the two riparian countries. A fifth of the world's oil, as well as a significant portion of the liquefied natural gas that supplies international markets, passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Any interruption of traffic has immediate consequences on energy prices, trade routes, and economies dependent on these imports.
The process has also sparked the interest of other regional actors. Pakistan has confirmed that it is holding consultations with various countries on the crisis in the Middle East and the situation in Hormuz. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has highlighted the role played by Oman and has assured that Islamabad will continue its diplomatic efforts to promote a "global and lasting" solution.
The US is considering new attacks
But these advances come at a time of maximum tension. The United States and Israel are preparing, according to American sources cited by international media, possible attacks against Iranian energy facilities, although President Donald Trump has not yet made a definitive decision. Tehran has already warned that it would respond with attacks against Israeli critical infrastructure and American energy facilities in the region.
Negotiations on Hormuz are thus progressing between two opposing realities. While Iran and Oman are trying to close the technical aspects to reopen a key maritime route, Washington and Tehran continue to negotiate the political conditions that will determine whether this agreement can ultimately become a stable solution to one of the most important regional crises. The paradox is that Hormuz could be reopened at the negotiating table and closed again on the military front.
