TEHRAN — Oman-Iran talks have made progress toward reopening the Strait of Hormuz and establishing rules for navigation through the countries’ territorial waters, according to regional officials familiar with the negotiations. The diplomatic movement coincided with a pause in U.S. strikes after 13 consecutive nights of bombing and a corresponding halt in Iranian attacks against neighboring countries hosting American forces.
Two regional sources said the discussions were moving in a positive direction but needed more time before a final agreement could be reached. Omani officials traveled to Tehran for direct meetings, and the sources said the United States intentionally paused its bombing campaign to avoid disrupting the sensitive in-person diplomacy. The White House and U.S. Central Command did not confirm that account.
The negotiations focus on reopening the strategic waterway while resolving competing Iranian, Omani and American positions over which routes commercial vessels should use. The Strait of Hormuz normally carries about one-fifth of the world’s oil, making the outcome critical for shipping companies, energy markets and consumers far beyond the Middle East.
Oman-Iran Talks Move Forward During Pause in Strikes
The Omani delegation’s visit came after nearly two weeks of escalating American attacks against Iranian military and infrastructure targets. No new U.S. bombing was reported overnight, and Iran said it had also stopped retaliatory operations against American allies because Washington had paused its strikes for two nights.
Iranian army spokesman Mohammad Akraminia warned that Tehran could resume and expand its attacks if the United States restarted its campaign. The simultaneous pauses nevertheless created the clearest opening for negotiations since fighting over control of the strait shattered an earlier ceasefire arrangement.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that Iranian and Omani officials held several rounds of technical discussions over the weekend. The Omani delegation left Tehran after the meetings, but Iranian officials said the process had made progress and would continue.
Oman has a long record of serving as an intermediary between Iran and the United States. Its position on the southern side of the strait, combined with its diplomatic relationships across the region, gives Muscat both a direct national interest in maritime stability and an unusual ability to communicate with governments that do not trust one another.
Dispute Centers on Routes, Control and Possible Fees
The central disagreement concerns how ships will move through the Strait of Hormuz and which government will control the process. Iran has demanded that vessels use a northern corridor closer to its coastline and has asserted that it could require prior authorization or collect fees for safe passage.
The United States has supported a southern route near Oman, where American forces can provide surveillance and protection. Commercial vessels increasingly used that corridor after an interim agreement was signed in June, but Iranian forces later attacked or intercepted some ships attempting to navigate through the southern area.
The current compromise under discussion would reportedly allow Iran to manage vessel transit while reducing restrictions on commercial ships. The precise terms remain unresolved, including whether ships would face fees, inspections, prior-approval requirements or different rules depending on whether they use Iranian or Omani territorial waters.
A durable agreement must distinguish between legitimate coastal-state responsibilities and an attempt to convert a vital international passage into a political tollbooth. Iran has security and sovereignty interests in its own territorial waters, but those interests cannot justify firing on civilian vessels or using access to global energy supplies as leverage against unrelated governments.
Earlier Agreements Failed to Produce Stable Passage
Iran and Oman have been discussing the future administration of the strait for months. A June meeting produced an agreement to create a joint working group involving both foreign ministries and to consult other coastal states and interested parties about navigation, maritime services and associated costs.
The two governments reaffirmed a commitment to safe passage under international law while emphasizing sovereignty over their territorial waters. Oman later hosted another round of talks led by Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, focused on safety and freedom of navigation.
Those discussions followed a June memorandum between the United States and Iran that temporarily reopened the strait and extended a ceasefire. Washington described the arrangement as allowing toll-free passage, while Tehran suggested that Iran and Oman would retain an administrative role over the waterway.
The arrangement quickly broke down as the governments accused one another of violating its terms. Iran renewed efforts to control traffic, the United States reimposed its blockade of Iranian ports and American aircraft began another sustained bombing campaign.
That history makes the latest reported progress significant but fragile. A written agreement will have limited value unless the parties establish clear routes, verification procedures, emergency communications and consequences for attacks or unauthorized interference.
Shipping Traffic Has Fallen to a Trickle
Commercial traffic has declined sharply as shipowners assess the risk of missiles, drones, warning shots and possible interception by Iranian or American forces. Only six ships crossed the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday, down from 15 the previous day, according to maritime intelligence data cited by CBS News.
Five of Thursday’s vessels used the northern route designated by Iran rather than the southern route supported by the United States. Iranian Revolutionary Guard forces later said they stopped four ships attempting to use what Tehran called an illegal and unsafe southern route, forcing them to change course after warning shots were fired.
A waterway can remain physically open while becoming commercially unusable. Tanker operators must consider crew safety, insurance coverage, vessel values, cargo losses and the possibility that a disputed transit could place a ship between opposing military forces.
Iran benefits from the uncertainty because it can reduce shipping without formally maintaining a complete blockade. Sporadic attacks and unpredictable enforcement can be sufficient to persuade companies to wait offshore, redirect cargo or demand substantially higher compensation before entering the strait.
The United States has also intensified enforcement of its blockade against Iranian ports. The U.S. military said it disabled a Mozambique-flagged commercial vessel in the Gulf of Oman after the ship allegedly ignored warnings and attempted to violate the blockade, demonstrating that risks to merchant traffic are not limited to Iranian action.
Oil and Gas Prices Depend on a Durable Agreement
The disruption has contributed to sharp movements in global energy markets. Brent crude reached approximately $101 a barrel before falling back near $96 as traders reacted to the pause in attacks and the possibility of diplomatic progress.
American gasoline prices averaged about $4.11 per gallon, compared with $3.16 at the same point a year earlier. Continued uncertainty around Hormuz has added a risk premium to crude oil, shipping, insurance and refining costs that can eventually reach households through gasoline, aviation, freight and consumer prices.
Both Iran and the United States therefore have economic reasons to reach an arrangement. Iran needs reliable export access and relief from the effects of the American blockade, while Washington faces growing domestic pressure from energy prices, military spending and the rapid consumption of expensive interceptors and precision weapons.
Gulf producers also need predictability. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Kuwait and Qatar depend heavily on regional waterways, and even countries with pipelines bypassing Hormuz cannot replace all the oil and liquefied natural gas normally shipped through the strait.
U.S. Tracks Negotiations While Keeping Military Options Open
The United States is closely monitoring the Oman-Iran talks, although American officials are not participating publicly in the current Tehran meetings. President Donald Trump said Iran wanted an agreement but suggested its leaders were not yet ready to accept one.
Trump has presented the administration with two possible paths: continue dismantling Iranian capabilities through sustained attacks or pursue a negotiated settlement. He has also threatened faster and broader military action, leaving open the possibility that the pause could end if diplomatic progress stalls.
That combination of pressure and negotiation may have helped return Iran to discussions, but it also creates a risk of miscalculation. A single attack on a ship, American base or Iranian facility could collapse the talks before the negotiators finish defining the maritime rules.
Congress should demand clarity about the conditions under which U.S. strikes would resume and the standards Washington would use to judge any Hormuz agreement. An arrangement that merely pauses attacks without establishing genuinely safe commercial navigation would postpone the crisis rather than resolve it.
A Deal Needs Enforcement, Not Just Diplomatic Language
Any final agreement should provide transparent and nondiscriminatory passage for commercial vessels, prevent arbitrary fees and create a direct communication channel for resolving maritime incidents. It should also define the roles of Iran, Oman, the United States and other coastal governments without granting any one country unchecked power over international trade.
Independent monitoring will be essential because each side has accused the other of violating previous arrangements. Shipping data, satellite tracking and documented incident reports could help establish whether traffic is moving freely and whether military forces are complying with agreed boundaries.
Oman’s mediation offers a practical path away from an increasingly expensive conflict. Its diplomats understand the geography, maintain working relationships with the competing governments and have already developed a framework for discussing navigation and maritime services.
The reported progress does not yet mean the Strait of Hormuz is reopening. It does mean the parties have moved from exchanging nightly attacks toward negotiating the rules of passage, creating an opportunity that should be tested carefully before another cycle of strikes closes it.
