manage

Oman’s proposal is based on the Strait of Malacca in East Asia, a model whereby ships that use the strait provide voluntary fees.

Iran and Oman have exchanged proposals regarding the future management of the Strait of Hormuz, as points of contention continue to exist between the two nations whose territorial waters border the strategic waterway.

Oman presented a proposal to Iran ⁠for ⁠a joint regional mechanism to manage the Strait of Hormuz with “voluntary fees”, Reuters reported on Tuesday. Under the Omani proposal, which reportedly has regional backing, Iran would not exercise sole control ⁠of the strait, an unnamed Gulf source and Western diplomat ⁠told the news agency.

Oman’s proposal is reportedly based on the Strait of Malacca, which connects the Indian and Pacific Oceans. There, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore ask ships that use the strait to voluntarily contribute to fund navigation, environmental protection, and ‌search-and-rescue operations.

This proposal aims to contribute to ending the global disruption to trade caused by the strait’s closure in the US-Israeli war on Iran. Tehran, however, says the strait ⁠cannot go back to its pre-war status where shipping flowed freely,

In comments to Iranian state media on Tuesday, Kazem Gharibabadi, the country’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, said Tehran rejects an Omani proposal for an equal division of transit routes between the two countries, as such a plan does not address Tehran’s security concerns.

Gharibabadi said that Tehran proposed to Oman that Iran would manage shipping through its side of ‌the strait and Muscat would manage part but not all of the opposite lane.

He added that Tehran has “no plans to negotiate with the US”, but affirmed talks are proceeding “step by step” with Oman, warning that Tehran will consider “any action” to maintain control over the strait, including the resumption of war.

“The Omanis are now suggesting three lines for the maritime traffic: one that runs through Iran’s territorial waters, an international one, and one through Omani territorial waters,” said Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar, reporting from Tehran. “Despite public statements, our sources tell us Iran is demonstrating some flexibility.”

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, also reporting from Tehran, said there remain many “points of contention” between Oman and Iran on Hormuz. These include the trajectory of the ships, the fees, the question of who will define the arrangements, and mine clearances – which will reportedly be Iran’s responsibility.

Paul Musgrave, a professor at Georgetown University in Qatar, said Oman’s proposal to Iran to get the Strait of Hormuz running again is positive, but it remains to be seen if hardliners in Iran will go for it.

Musgrave noted that under the Strait of Malacca model, voluntary contributions raise about $70m annually, far from the $1m per ship that’s reportedly been proposed by Tehran as a “service fee” in the Strait of Hormuz.

Meanwhile, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) foreign ministers met via video call on Tuesday to discuss the latest developments in the conflict, including ways to improve cooperation on issues surrounding freedom and navigation through the waterway, a statement from the Qatari Foreign Ministry said.

The United States suspended a nearly two-week-long campaign of air strikes against Iran over the weekend after pressure from regional mediators to find a diplomatic solution and to return to the memorandum of understanding signed in June, which would allow shipping to resume in the Strait of Hormuz. The strait carried one-fifth of global energy supplies before ⁠the February 28 start of the US-Israel war on Iran.

As Washington and Tehran move towards a long-term ceasefire agreement, Gulf states will likely look for new long-term security solutions when a war in their region – which they did not start – finally ends.

It comes as United States President Donald Trump cancelled new strikes on Iran saying that a deal with Tehran was imminent, and that a “time” and “place” for signing would soon be announced.

In Tehran, officials appeared more cautious with one senior Iranian official telling Al Jazeera that the government was still reviewing a proposed Memorandum of Understanding with Washington.

Subsequent comments by Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif point to a deal being made, and what follows in the coming days could have important implications for collective regional security.

Attacks on the Gulf

The United States operates military facilities in at least 19 locations across the MENA region, including permanent bases in Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. Between 40,000 and 50,000 US troops were stationed across the region before the war on Iran started.

This US-Gulf nexus appeared to insulate states from conflicts engulfing other parts of the region, but over the past four months, Gulf states hosting US military facilities have been targeted by Iran.

“If there is a way to describe the prevailing security model in the region since the 1980s, the concept of security partnerships best encapsulates it,” said Mahjoub Al-Zuwairi, an academic and expert on Middle East politics.

“The countries of the region have chosen to align their security with broad international alliances. For decades, this model has provided a reasonable deterrent and logistical and intelligence depth that is difficult to replace.”

A security umbrella with holes

The war on Iran has exposed a paradox – while Iranian officials have repeatedly referred to their Gulf neighbours as “brothers”, they have also repeatedly targeted them during the war.

Despite the protestations of Gulf states that no attacks on Iran were launched from their soil, they have been repeatedly targeted.

At least 28 people have been killed across the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states in suspected Iranian drone and rocket attacks, since the US and Israel launched their offensive on Iran on 28 February. This has led to questions about the US-Gulf security arrangement.

“Just the war itself has pierced that sense of security, the US security umbrella is moribund at worst, or ineffective at best,” Simon Mabon, professor of international relations at Lancaster University, told Al Jazeera.

“They’ve long relied on it for their own security. Yet the presence of US forces on their territory directly meant they became targets. They can’t escape their geography [and] despite the tensions, despite the hostilities, despite the attacks, Iran isn’t going away. They have to find a way of dealing with this reality.”

The economic cost of war

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has proven be a setback for some Gulf states working to diversify their energy-reliant economies towards tourism, services and finance, but not all have been affected equally.

Saudi Arabia was able to redirect some oil exports through its East-West pipeline to the Red Sea, while Oman – whose main ports are outside the Strait of Hormuz – has also benefited from rising energy prices.

The UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar have been more heavily affected due to their dependence on the waterway for their energy exports, but the war has encouraged new thinking on long-standing security and economic arrangements.

“There are new pipelines being set up, but the capacity of these alternatives is infinitely smaller than the Strait itself,” said Mabon. “It will take enormous investment and years of development before they can come close to replacing it.”

Moving closer to Iran?

One possible lesson from the conflict is that Gulf states may seek engagement with Iran rather than confrontation, something that Gulf states had already made some groundwork on before the US-Israel war began.

The UAE restored diplomatic ties with Tehran in 2022, and a year later, Saudi Arabia and Iran agreed to normalise relations in a deal brokered by China.

Al-Zuwairi says that the conflict could revive plans for MENA-led regional security arrangements, as envisioned in the 2019 Hormuz Peace Initiative, which proposed a Gulf security framework involving Iran, Iraq and the six GCC states.

But the distrust fostered since then – notably Tehran’s strikes on its Gulf neighbours – would make such a formation unlikely in the near future. 

“The recent war has opened the door wide to reconsidering the Gulf security system with its neighbours,” Al-Zuwairi said.

“How can Tehran propose a non-aggression pact while raining missiles on neighbouring cities? The initiative appears theoretically sound but practically bankrupt unless Iranian behaviour changes.”

Looking beyond Washington?

The solution for the Gulf could be a hybrid arrangement where ties with Washington are maintained, but other regional and domestic options are explored, including greater investment in local defence industries.

A possible blueprint for this could be the mutual defence agreement between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan last September, stating that an attack on one country would be considered an attack on both.

Yet previous instances when Gulf states felt abandoned by the US have led to divergent responses, with the UAE and Bahrain deepening ties with Israel, but a new paradigm means that a more collective action to the issue of security might be considered.

“The war has demonstrated that every guarantor, no matter how many banners it flies, primarily protects its own interests,” said Al-Zuwairi.

“The region ends up paying the price for a war it did not choose … The security of the Gulf will not be created in Washington … It will be created when Gulf countries recognise that they must build it themselves, because when fires start, it is always those closest to the flames who pay the price.”

For Ross Stripling, baseball was something of an accidental career.

He walked onto the team at Texas A&M, majoring in business finance, planning to stick around campus long enough to earn a master’s degree. After his junior year, he turned down a six-figure bonus offered by the Colorado Rockies. After his senior year, he accepted a six-figure bonus to sign with the Dodgers, only to blow out his elbow after one season in the minor leagues.

He was 24. He was at peace. He called home.

“I think the right thing to do is to say I did this baseball thing and go start my life,” he told his father.

If you’re a Dodgers fan, you know the rest of his baseball story: In his major league debut, Stripling was five outs from a no-hitter when Dodgers manager Dave Roberts yanked him. In his nine years in the major leagues, including five with the Dodgers, he pitched in the All-Star Game and the World Series, and he once pitched with his “Chicken Strip” nickname on the back of his game jersey.

His father knew best. Instead of giving up on baseball when he needed Tommy John surgery, his father encouraged Stripling to use the yearlong rehabilitation process as a way to explore what a future without baseball might look like. His grandfather set him up with an internship at an investment firm.

Five years ago, Stripling and his mentor from that firm founded their own financial services company, called Skyward Financial. Now, 21 months after Stripling threw his last pitch in the major leagues, he is throwing a new one: Hey, young athletes coming into a lot of money, I’ve lived in that world, and I’ll show you how to protect your money and build toward generational wealth.

“It’s not me trying to become the next Wolf of Wall Street,” Stripling said. “This is genuine. I want to help kids and their families out in a space that has gotten out of hand in a hurry.”

Matthew Houston, the mentor, said Stripling blew away the brokers when he interviewed for that internship.

“He brings with him, like, a two-inch folder stuffed with handwritten stock reports he had written on minor league bus trips,” Houston said. “He handed us a couple of them, and they were legit Wall Street reports, him doing analysis of stocks. We were falling out of our chair.”

Stripling soon earned his broker’s license. Over the past decade, Houston estimated, he and Stripling might have traded messages about markets and clients “25 to 50 times a day.” One night, Houston watched Stripling pitch on television. Not long after the game ended, he heard the ping of a text message.

“I had just seen him on TV, and it’s like, ‘What do you think about Celgene and Gilead in the biotech sector?’” Houston said. “My mind was blown.”

You don’t need to have played in the major leagues to realize how much money athletes make. Major brokerages want a piece of that money. Some even use former athletes to recruit current ones.

Marc Isenberg, the former director of financial education for Morgan Stanley’s sports and entertainment group and author of the “Money Players” guide for young athletes, wished Stripling well but said he would face significant competition from firms with bigger names and greater resources.

“It’s oversaturated,” Isenberg said. “Almost every single Wall Street firm, to compete for athletes and entertainers, has a sports and entertainment group.”

And it’s not just the behemoths. Stripling checked with a basketball agent, who said he represents 24 college players that each have a different money manager.

There is nothing revolutionary about Stripling’s message: limit the flashy spending now in favor of prudent savings and investment, so you can grow your money through and beyond your career.

Stripling believes he can win by concentrating on young athletes, the ones suddenly showered in six- or seven-figure payments from draft bonuses, college revenue sharing payments, and name, image and likeness deals.

“I’ve seen the first-rounders come in and blow money on cars and houses and gambling,” Stripling said, “and I’ve seen the first-rounders like (former Dodgers shortstop Corey) Seager, who probably hasn’t spent a dime of his signing bonus.”

In a presentation for young athletes — and for the pro teams and college athletic departments that might invite him to speak — Stripling’s firm uses his story of a baseball prospect that got a $900,000 up-front payment and spent the $500,000 after taxes on a red Lamborghini. If the prospect had invested that $500,000 over 30 years into a fund that tracked the S&P 500, he would have made $8.6 million.

“That was the dumbest decision I’ve ever seen anyone make,” Stripling said.

“I have these stories from being in the locker room. I hope that, as a player, my story resonates more than a guy from Goldman Sachs saying, ‘Yeah, we’ve got a couple good ETFs.’”

Stripling would love the chance to speak at one of the Dodgers’ morning meetings in spring training, where players hear briefings about everything from safety and security to social media.

“I’d like to learn more about it, but I’d be open to putting him in front of the guys,” Roberts said. “I definitely trust him.”

In the meantime, Stripling has a federal record. All brokers do. One form requires brokers to list their employers and job descriptions over the last 10 years. Among all the wealth strategists and financial advisors and registered representatives, Stripling’s form is the one with the job history that starts with this line: “LA Dodgers, Pitcher.”