Oman

Six months into the war on Iran, the largest US oil companies have posted their biggest profits since 2022, selling less oil at far higher prices. But the conflict is also putting their longstanding Gulf investments at risk, exposing the industry’s uneasy balance between wartime gains and mounting geopolitical vulnerability for investors worldwide.

Since the war began on February 28, Brent crude has risen about 22 percent, from $72 to $88 a barrel.

The Strait of Hormuz – through which one-fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas was shipped before the war – remains largely closed to commercial traffic, though Iran and Oman agreed last week on a temporary maritime route. Iran says the strait will not fully reopen until the United States fulfils its commitments under a lapsed interim peace deal, leaving longer-term security and management arrangements unresolved.

In the absence of a lasting resolution, the disruption is likely to continue supporting higher energy prices and creating windfalls for producers, despite placing energy companies’ regional assets and future projects at greater risk.

Rahul Choudhary, vice president of Upstream Research at Rystad Energy, an independent energy research company, said the conflict has already reduced the amount of oil and gas US energy firms are drawing from the Gulf region.

“Overall we expect US companies’ share of gas supplies [from the region] to fall by around 40 percent this year compared to last year [and] the share of oil supplies to drop by 30-35 percent,” he told Al Jazeera.

While higher commodity prices have helped offset the immediate financial impact, Choudhary said prolonged disruption is likely to delay major projects and weigh on the future growth plans of US oil and gas companies with a presence in the region.

Who has profited?

The surge in the oil price since early March, when Iran first closed the Strait of Hormuz, has delivered a windfall for oil companies, but gains have been tempered by challenges in the Gulf.

Chevron has limited exposure to Arab Gulf supply disruptions, with the region accounting for just 5 percent of its total global output. The group reported its highest quarterly profit in six years of $12bn in adjusted earnings on July 31.

ExxonMobil, by contrast, has been far more exposed to disruption in the Middle East, with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and Iranian attacks on US-linked infrastructure in the region affecting its operations in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which together account for 20 percent of its global equity upstream supply, according to Choudhary.

“We already saw in H1 [the first half of] 2026, the company’s upstream earnings dropped by around $1.3bn compared to H1 2025, due to lower upstream volumes from the Middle East. However, the shortfall was covered well by higher commodity prices,” Choudhary said.

The contrast highlights a broader divide between those US energy companies which have benefitted from tighter global supply – and the corresponding rise in the oil price – and those with assets, partnerships or operations in the Gulf at greater risk of disruption caused by recent attacks on energy facilities.

Where are US energy companies exposed in the Gulf?

The Gulf’s energy sector is dominated by state-owned giants such as Saudi Aramco, Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) and QatarEnergy.

Although these national oil and gas companies retain control over the region’s reserves and core infrastructure, US energy firms have carved out strategic positions across the region.

US companies generate revenue through stakes in production assets, joint ventures, production agreements, refining and petrochemical projects, as well as through long-term contracts to provide equipment, engineering and operational expertise.

ExxonMobil has some of the largest US commercial interests in the Gulf.

The company has been a major partner in Qatar’s LNG sector for decades, holding stakes in several QatarEnergy LNG joint ventures linked to the expansion of the North Field. The field is the Qatari section of the North Field-South Pars structure, the world’s largest natural gas field, which Qatar shares with Iran, where it is known as South Pars. ExxonMobil also holds an interest in the UAE’s Upper Zakum offshore oilfield alongside ADNOC.

Similarly, ConocoPhillips joined the North Field East (NFE) and North Field South (NFS) expansion projects with QatarEnergy in 2022 to increase export capacity at Ras Laffan.

The US group, Occidental Petroleum, has become one of the largest foreign producers in Oman, operating the Mukhaizna heavy oilfield, the country’s biggest producing oilfield. It also holds interests in UAE gas and pipeline projects.

Chevron maintains a smaller but strategically important Gulf footprint. Through Saudi Arabian Chevron, the company operates oil assets in the Saudi-Kuwait Partitioned Zone, including the Wafra field. In July, it said it was exploring potential routes to move Iraqi crude to Mediterranean export terminals, which could reduce reliance on the Strait of Hormuz.

Where have attacks on energy facilities taken place?

According to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED), a US-registered independent conflict monitor, Iran and Iran-backed groups in the region have carried out at least 172 attacks on nonmilitary infrastructure across the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries since the US and Israel launched their war on February 28.

Energy infrastructure has been hit hardest, with oil and gas facilities, along with power plants and desalination plants, accounting for nearly half (48 percent) of all strikes on nonmilitary targets.

The UAE, Kuwait and Bahrain have suffered the highest number of successful strikes, with the majority aimed at oil and gas facilities.

Among the sites that have been struck are Kuwait’s Mina Abdullah and Mina al-Ahmadi refineries, the Bahrain Petroleum Company oil refinery, and ADNOC’s al-Ruwais Industrial City and the Habshan gas complex.

There have also been several strikes on Saudi Aramco facilities, most recently a drone strike on July 27 on the Abqaiq processing complex, one of the most critical nodes in Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure, processing more than seven million barrels of oil per day.

Nasser Khdour, Middle East assistant research manager at ACLED, said: “Oil and gas facilities, power plants and water desalination plants are likely to remain key targets for Iran because disruption to these sectors can increase economic pressure on Gulf states, while disruption to global energy supplies increases prices and pressure on the US during periods of escalation.”

In March, a drone attack close to the Saudi Aramco-ExxonMobil SAMREF refinery in Yanbu disrupted oil loading at the city’s Red Sea port. While the attack had only minimal operational impact, it highlighted the vulnerability of US-linked energy assets in the region.

Qatar’s Ras Laffan Industrial City, the world’s largest LNG export hub, which hosts major joint ventures between QatarEnergy, ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips, also came under repeated attack in March, at one point forcing the plant to halt production entirely. In June, an explosion as a result of a “technical malfunction” on Qatar’s Barzan gas project, where ExxonMobil holds a stake, killed at least 13 people.

“In terms of gas assets being impacted, major blows have been [dealt to] companies [that are] part of LNG projects in Qatar: ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips,” Choudhary said.

He added that ExxonMobil’s share of LNG supply from Qatar is expected to fall significantly this year to about four million tonnes compared with 13 million tonnes last year, while ConocoPhillips has also experienced reduced volumes to one million tonnes this year compared with 2.5 million tonnes last year.

The attacks on Qatar’s LNG infrastructure could have longer-term consequences. Damage to LNG trains at Ras Laffan could take years to repair, according to QatarEnergy, while delays to Qatar’s North Field expansion projects could push back planned supply growth.

“The attack on LNG trains 4 and 6 at Rasgas damaged roughly 13 million tonnes of capacity, which will take anywhere between three to five years to come back online with a total repair cost estimate of around $3bn,” said Choudhary.

He added that the second most impacted gas project has been the Shah gas project in the UAE, in which Occidental Petroleum has a 40-percent stake and where drone attacks in March caused a fire at the gas plant that halted operations.

The conflict has also affected ExxonMobil’s oil interests in the UAE, Choudhary said. Production from Upper Zakum, where ExxonMobil has a 28 percent stake, was reduced between March and May when export routes were disrupted, limiting the ability to move offshore crude.

Beyond the UAE, the most significant impact on US companies’ oilfield operations played out in Iraq. A drone attack hit the Sarsang oilfield in March, followed by an explosion at one of its storage facilities in April, together causing damage to the field.

Looking ahead, Choudhary said higher prices could support cash flows, but prolonged conflict risks could threaten future growth. ExxonMobil’s $10bn Upper Zakum and Qatar LNG expansions could face delays, while ConocoPhillips remains exposed through investments in higher-risk markets, including its planned 42-percent stake in BP’s Kirkuk operations in Iraq.

“For companies like Chevron and Occidental Petroleum, whose presence are in less volatile countries like Israel and Oman respectively, the impact of escalations will not be as severe, as we have not seen significant disruption in these countries,” said Choudhary.

US oilfield service companies in the Gulf

Oilfield service giants, including US firms SLB (formerly Schlumberger), Halliburton and Baker Hughes, provide drilling technologies, equipment and operational expertise across the Gulf, supporting Saudi Aramco, ADNOC and QatarEnergy.

For oilfield service companies, the outlook is mixed, according to Chinmayi Teggi, energy research analyst at Rystad Energy, a research group. While higher oil prices and energy security concerns could lift demand over time, near-term margins remain under pressure from higher logistical costs, supply-chain disruptions and delayed projects.

“For the Big Three (SLB, Baker Hughes and Halliburton), the conflict continues to weigh on regional revenues,” Teggi told Al Jazeera, adding that second-quarter Middle East revenues were down 8-10 percent compared with the previous year across the three companies, while higher oil prices meant revenues were higher in other geographies.

However, a recovery in suspended operations and production could help drive growth into 2027.

For US companies, therefore, the Gulf remains both an opportunity and a risk.

“The impact on US companies will depend on the extent of exposure and countries in which these companies are present,” Choudhary said.

Their investments have secured US access to some of the world’s most important oil and LNG projects, but the conflict has exposed the risk of operating in a region where energy infrastructure has become increasingly vulnerable to geopolitical conflict.

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly warned Iran against restricting access to the Strait of Hormuz, arguing that the waterway must remain open to global commerce.

But for companies with billions of dollars invested across the Gulf, the challenge isn’t just about keeping shipments moving – it is ensuring the infrastructure remains secure, they say.

It has been six months since February 28, when the US and Israel shocked the world by launching missile strikes on Iran, killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several senior Iranian officials in Tehran, as well as scores of children in a school in Minab, southern Iran.

US President Donald Trump then claimed the conflict would only last “four to five weeks”.

In the months since, the war has erupted on several other fronts, reaching as far as the Caspian Sea. It has triggered a global oil supply crisis as the US and Iran battle for control of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, through which more than one-fifth of oil and natural gas cargo transited.

And it has resulted in an estimated 8,000-10,000 deaths, as well as tens of thousands of injuries.

The conflict is also realigning the global order, experts say, as new alliances form and dominant ones show signs of crumbling.

Here’s what we know:

Has the US achieved any of its war objectives?

The US’s goals were not initially clear: officials first claimed the strikes were carried out in preemptive self-defence.

According to demands presented on the eve of the war, and a jumble of sometimes contradictory statements from Trump and senior US defence officials, they include the following:

Iran’s nuclear programme

Despite Trump’s claim that the US had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear capabilities when it joined in at the end of Israel’s 12-day war on Iran in June 2025, the US and Israel again claimed in February that Tehran was just weeks away from developing nuclear weapons.

Repeated strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites during the war have likely caused vast damage to the facilities, but it is believed Tehran still possesses 440kg of highly enriched uranium, which could be used to make a weapon.

The Trump administration wanted Iran to hand over this stock to the US and to commit to zero enrichment of uranium going forward. Iran refused to do this, although at one point appeared open to the possibility of handing the stock over to a third country. Iran also insisted on retaining the capacity to develop a nuclear power programme, which requires much lower levels of uranium enrichment.

Later, Trump briefly floated the idea of US troops retrieving the stock by force – a potentially dangerous mission.

In the June 17 memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed by both sides, Iran agreed not to pursue a nuclear weapon – something it had always pledged anyway. The MoU unravelled as its vague wording led to disagreements about what it actually stipulated.

Clark Summers, a US military veteran and professor at Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina, said the US “can rightly assert that these ends have been achieved. Although for how long before Iran can rebuild is difficult to assess.”

But Iranian expert and professor at the Australian National University (ANU), Alam Saleh, disagreed, and noted that Iran’s nuclear power programme is still intact. “The US lost even before the war,” he said, adding that the effort also shows that Washington failed in last year’s 12-day war.

Regime change in Iran

On day one of the war – February 28 – the US killed Khamenei alongside several other senior officials. Trump, two days earlier, said regime change is “the best thing that could happen”.

As the US launched missiles, he also called on “Iranian patriots who yearn for freedom to seize this moment to be brave, be bold, be heroic, and take back your country”.

Iran’s political leadership has, however, remained largely the same under the new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei – the late ayatollah’s son.

Summers told Al Jazeera that the goal may have been “ad hoc” or improvised rather than well-planned. But “killing leaders does not mean strategic achievements, even if it’s a tactical success,” Saleh said.

Ending support for regional proxy groups

Iran’s “axis of resistance” is an umbrella comprising a number of armed groups around the region that it funds. This includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and several smaller groups in Iraq and Syria.

There are no signs that Tehran’s support for them has ended, and this demand did not appear in the MoU signed by the US.

Hezbollah went to war with Israel in Iran’s defence, and Iran has refused to negotiate an end to the war unless the Lebanon front is included. The Houthis, meanwhile, have launched a blockade on Saudi Arabia in the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, partly in support of Iran.

Iran’s ballistic missiles programme

Washington swore it would “raze” Iran’s missile facilities to the ground when it launched the war on February 28. The US also pledged to destroy Iran’s navy.

Trump has since claimed that about 82 percent of Iran’s missiles are gone and the navy is degraded.

In April, he also said that 158 Iranian naval vessels had been hit, while US Central Command (CENTCOM) has continued to announce dozens of strikes on command centres of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Iran, however, has continued to fire missiles, most recently launching a long-range missile in July that killed three US soldiers in Jordan.

Furthermore, the demand for an end to Iran’s ballistic missiles programme was also absent from the July MoU.

Control of Iranian oil

In June, Trump said the US would seize and control Iran’s Kharg island, the heart of Iranian oil production.

To date, the US does not control any Iranian territory.

What have the US and Iran gained and lost during the war?

Besides the US demands at the start of the war, several other pressure points have emerged during the conflict.

Control of the Strait of Hormuz

Soon after the war began, Iran in effect closed the narrow but critical Strait of Hormuz, which passes through its territorial waters as well as those of Oman. Since then, shipping traffic has slumped from more than 100 ships per day to an average of about five.

To enforce this closure, Iran began striking vessels in the strait, the only route to the open ocean for Gulf oil and gas producers, which had not gained its explicit permission to pass through.

The US responded with its own naval blockade on Iranian ports in and around the strait. This is continuing.

Despite a large number of expletive-laden demands from Trump since then – many of them on social media – that Tehran reopen the strait, Iran has not budged. It is currently negotiating plans for the future of the waterway, through which more than one-fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas supplies were shipped before the war, with Oman.

As part of these negotiations, Iran announced this week that it has agreed to a shipping route, which it will partially control, with Oman.

While Trump has recently claimed that the US has “full control” of the strait and that it is open to vessels, shipping remains at an all-time low and Iran has continued to fire at any vessels trying to pass without its permission.

Iran sees the strait as its main piece of leverage in the war with the US, which Salah said, Iran views as an “existential threat”.

Economic impact

• Iran: The war’s impact on Iran’s economy has been severe. The Iranian rial has in effect collapsed. Food prices have surged amid the war, and the US blockade and renewed sanctions have hampered Iranian oil exports, with the blockade cutting oil revenue by at least $6bn. Tehran’s economy has long been battered by US sanctions, although the fragile ceasefire provided temporary relief. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said last week that economic pressure is a “rerun we know by heart” and that the country knows how to survive it.
• US: US consumers have also felt the pressure of the war at the petrol pump, making the conflict highly unpopular. A July poll by The Associated Press revealed that two-thirds of Americans are against the conflict. While many tend to forget there’s a war, Summers said, they do remember it acutely when petrol prices rise. In states like California, gasoline prices doubled. That anger will likely translate into a political backlash against Republicans in November’s midterms, experts say.

Relations with allies

• Iran: Iran’s targeting of US military assets as well as both military and nonmilitary infrastructure in neighbouring Gulf states and Jordan has not made it popular regionally, experts note. Iran has hit infrastructure in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman and Bahrain. Those states have called this a violation of their sovereignty. However, Iran’s economic and political ties with China have held, as Beijing has managed a delicate dance by advocating against sanctions on Iran while refraining from becoming fully entangled in the conflict. Trade relations with Russia also remain strong.
• US: The US has faced reluctance from its NATO allies to back it up in this war. Despite being asked directly by Trump, they have refused to join the war. Spain and Italy, in particular, have highly criticised the conflict, while Germany, Israel’s strongest ally in Europe, has done the same. France rejected calls to send warships to enforce the blockade. Gulf allies, Pakistan and Turkiye have all similarly refused, while in Asia, Japan, Australia and South Korea all declined to get involved. Gulf allies are also likely weighing the fact that it is the US’s war on Iran which has caused them to become targets.

Military capabilities

• Iran: US experts say that claims Washington has degraded Iran’s military capabilities are correct. Several army bases have been struck while Iran’s ballistic missile stockpiles are down by about 82 percent, according to Trump. However, Iran is still launching missiles and, while nuclear facilities have been damaged, it still has possession of its enriched uranium stockpile. Experts point out that Iran likely has a bigger appetite for an atomic weapon now than before the war began. Tehran has also continued to produce and deploy its mass-produced, cheap Shahed drones. An estimated 1,221 military personnel were killed by April, although the real toll is likely higher.
• US: The US has lost 18 soldiers and more than 750 have been wounded. That’s “quite low”, Summers said. However, US media reports suggest the Pentagon has severely depleted stockpiles of some of its most powerful and most expensive weapons – particularly its Patriot defence missiles – something Washington denies. Those missiles are only produced in the dozens annually and cost millions of dollars each. In August, the US signed a $22.9bn deal with manufacturer Raytheon to boost Tomahawk cruise missile production from 60 to more than 1,000 annually.

Is there an outright ‘victor’?

Observers say there is not.

“Both of them have not achieved anything,” Saleh of ANU said, noting that the US has failed to translate military superiority to actual gains despite being a “superpower” fighting a “middle power”.

China and Russia are likely observing Washington’s weaknesses, making new military calculations in the event of a future conflict with the US, he said. That has implications for Taiwan, especially as the US has now deployed its last aircraft carrier in the Pacific to the Middle East. The shift leaves the US without an aircraft carrier in the Western Pacific, despite Washington’s previous strategic emphasis on the region.

“Iran surviving also does not mean it’s a winner,” however, Saleh said. “This might be a defeat for the US, but it’s not a victory for Iran either.”

Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani is due to visit Tehran on Thursday for talks on de-escalating tensions and reviving dialogue between Iran and the United States.

A spokesman for Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced the visit in a statement on X on Wednesday.

Majed al-Ansari said Sheikh Mohammed, who is also Qatar’s foreign minister, will meet with “a number of Iranian officials” in Tehran to “discuss ways to de-escalate tensions” and “create the conditions conducive to dialogue”.

“The visit comes in line with the State of Qatar’s firm position that the diplomatic path is the best means of resolving differences & promoting security & stability in the region,” he added.

Iran also confirmed the visit, saying the discussions will cover “the continuation of Qatar’s mediation efforts and initiatives, as well as other regional developments”.

Qatar has served as a back-channel negotiator between Washington and Tehran and helped secure a memorandum of understanding in June that briefly paused hostilities. The agreement collapsed in July, and the conflict is now nearing its sixth month, with fighting largely paused but no diplomatic breakthrough in sight.

The US has, meanwhile, promised to increase economic pressure on Tehran by sanctioning its trade partners.

US President Donald Trump told Al Jazeera on Wednesday that he was in “no hurry” to resume talks with Iran, saying that he believed economic and military action against Tehran were both effective.

“I have no time schedule; whatever it takes,” he said.

‘Economic terrorism’

Iran has continued to denounce the economic pressure campaign.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote to the United Nations on Wednesday calling the new sanctions an “act of state and economic terrorism” and urging member states not to implement them.

“The sanctions deliberately harm civilians by restricting access to food, medicine, medical equipment, energy and other essentials, violating rights including the rights to life, health, food and an adequate standard of living”, he said.

The two sides also remain at odds over the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic waterway that handled one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments before the US-Israel war on Iran began in February.

Iran wants control over the strait, while the US wants it to remain an international waterway that is free for all. That disagreement in part led to the collapse of the memorandum signed in June.

Oil flows through the strait have since fallen to a three-month low, with just 5 million barrels per day (bpd) transiting on Monday. Before the war, the strait carried roughly 20 million bpd of crude oil.

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry said Sheikh Mohammed will also discuss the waterway in his meetings in Tehran on Thursday, focusing on “the need for it to return to the status quo prior to February 28”.

Regional diplomacy

Sheikh Mohammed’s visit comes two days after Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi met his Iranian counterpart, Araghchi, in Tehran.

Following those talks, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, said the two countries had agreed on a new temporary route for shipping in the strait.

But he insisted that the waterway will not reopen until the US fulfils its commitments under the June deal, including the lifting of sanctions and the release of frozen assets.

Pakistan’s army chief, Asim Munir, also visited Tehran earlier in the week in a bid to “end the stalemate” in the conflict, with Islamabad reporting “significant progress” in those talks.

Mostafa Khoshcheshm, a professor at the University of Applied Sciences in Tehran, said that regional countries were pushing for dialogue because “they believe that the situation is moving towards escalation”.

“They know that if war breaks out, it would be a fully-fledged war and the fire would spill over into the entire region and beyond, leaving a detrimental impact on the global economy,” he said. “So there are hectic diplomatic moves on the part of these countries.”

A top Iranian official says Iran and Oman have agreed on a new temporary route for shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, but insisted that the waterway will not reopen until the United States fulfils its commitments under an interim peace deal signed in June.

The remarks by Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, came on Tuesday, after Iran and Oman’s top diplomats held talks in Tehran to finalise the details of a phased framework for managing the strait.

Iran and Oman, both coastal nations on the strait, have been in on-and-off talks for weeks about controlling traffic through the strategic waterway, which handled one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments before the US-Israel war on Tehran began in February.

Most ⁠shipping in the strait has been shut down since then.

Gharibabadi, speaking on state television, said Iran and Oman had agreed the new route’s entry “would be through our territorial waters, and part of the exit route would also be through our territorial waters”.

The transit corridor would be seven miles (11.3km) wide, he said.

“The agreed-upon transit route with Oman is a temporary route,” he added.

Earlier on Tuesday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with his Omani counterpart, Badr Albusaidi, in Tehran to discuss the temporary navigation corridor as well as a project to clear mines from the strait, according to a joint statement.

Albusaidi said on X he hoped the countries would “soon announce” the corridor, adding that “future management of the strait and a permanent solution will follow in due course.”

Technical talks are planned to develop a long-term arrangement, including mechanisms for information sharing and navigational and security services, according to the statement.

Mines in Hormuz

The Strait of Hormuz became a flashpoint after Tehran responded to the US-Israel war by closing the waterway. It then announced a new shipping route through its territorial waters, bypassing the internationally recognised Traffic Separation Scheme adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in 1968. Tehran said that route had been mined.

Then in June, when Iran and the US signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to end the war, Oman and the IMO announced a new transit corridor in the Strait of Hormuz – backed by the US – that hugged the Omani coast.

Iran said the so-called southern route violated the MoU and launched attacks on ships using the corridor, resulting in the collapse of the interim deal.

Diplomatic efforts towards a broader peace deal have since stalled, and passage through the strait remains dangerous. An oil tanker was disabled by an unidentified projectile on Tuesday near Oman’s Ash Shishah, close to the strait’s entrance, the United Kingdom’s maritime trade watchdog said.

Gharibabadi, in his comments on Tuesday, said Iran would not consider the strait open despite the agreement with Oman.

He also dismissed a claim by US President Donald Trump that all mines had been cleared from the strait’s international waters, saying it was “only aimed at calming the markets”. He warned that US mine-detection vessels would become “very good targets” if they entered the area.

Gharibabadi insisted the US must fulfil its commitments under the MoU – including sanctions relief and the release of frozen Iranian assets – if it wants a return to the diplomatic track.

He also urged countries to resist US pressure over sanctions on Iran.

Trump had announced last week the “most crushing economic operation ever” against Iran, and threatened sanctions against any country that does business with it.

“We are urging countries not to succumb to American pressure regarding the sanctions that Washington wants to impose on us,” Gharibabadi said, adding that Washington was “mistaken about its ability to enforce its sanctions against our neighbours”.

He said an earlier US sanctions campaign under Trump had failed to achieve its goals and predicted new measures would meet the same fate.

“The new American sanctions are doomed to failure, and we have our own methods to counter them,” he added.

Trump says all mines have been cleared from Strait of Hormuz’s international waters and that Tehran received warnings that ships laying new mines will be ‘destroyed’.

Islamabad, Pakistan — Pakistani Field Marshal Asim Munir spent Monday moving through the power corridors of Tehran: the presidency, parliament, the Supreme National Security Council, and the foreign and interior ministries.

He met Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, as well as Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who is Tehran’s chief negotiator in talks with the United States to end their now six-month-long war.

But amid a deadlock in those peace negotiations, many analysts say that Munir’s true test as mediator will lie in his ability to use his position as one of the region’s most powerful military leaders to convince his Iranian counterparts in olive uniforms to agree to a return to talks with Washington.

Days before Munir’s visit, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told a gathering of doctors in Tehran that it was time to end the war while Iran held the advantage, a message aimed as much at Tehran’s own security establishment as at Washington.

“It is better that we bring the war to an end now as we are in a position of power and dignity,” he said, adding that “the whole world acknowledges our victory”.

Hours later, on August 21, the chief of the general staff of Iran’s armed forces, Major-General Ali Abdollahi, promised “revolutionary, crushing, regret-inducing and devastating” responses to any American miscalculation.

It was a sharp illustration of the gap between Iran’s president and the men now running its military — one that Munir will need to also navigate, analysts say.

And that’s why Munir’s most significant meeting on Monday might have been with General Mohsen Rezaei, a representative of Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei and the newly appointed secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. Rezaei is essentially the bridge between the military and Khamenei.

State of the war

Munir’s visit to Tehran came on a day when the region and the world were bracing for US President Donald Trump’s threatened “economic D-Day” sanctions against Iran, accompanied by a threatened punishment for all countries that continue to trade with Tehran.

Later in the day, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent unveiled “Operation Economic Outcast“, a sweeping sanctions campaign targeting Iran’s digital assets, gold, aviation, technology and shipping networks.

But while warning other countries to sever trade ties with Iran, he held back from actually announcing any penalties for those nations, acknowledging that such a step would “blow up the global financial system”.

Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking the same day, kept the option of renewed strikes open.

“If we need to use kinetic strikes, we’ll use them. If Iran is foolish enough to overplay their hand or mess with the American military, we’ll do what we need to do,” he said.

It’s unclear whether Munir’s visit helped stave off broader US action against Iran and its trading partners.

But the timing was significant, analysts point out. Munir travelled to Tehran days after taking a phone call from United States President Donald Trump, who reportedly asked Islamabad to use its influence to bring Iran back to the table.

Pakistan’s Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said the one-day visit had produced “comprehensive discussions” on reopening the Strait of Hormuz and ending the war.

Iranian officials, the ISPR added, “appreciated Pakistan’s constructive role and sincere efforts”.

Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi, who travelled with Munir, went further, calling the talks “very positive and productive” and saying “significant progress was made”.

A reshuffled Iranian military

This was his fourth visit to Tehran this year, but his first since Iran’s military hierarchy changed earlier this month.

On August 10, Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei installed Abdollahi as chief of the general staff and moved Rezaei into the Supreme National Security Council. Ahmad Vahidi, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), has held his post since March, when his predecessor was killed in the war’s opening strikes.

It is these military men that analysts say are now shaping Iran’s war moves, potentially giving a fellow man in uniform an edge over traditional diplomats in convincing Tehran to get back to talks.

“It is increasingly the IRGC and the wider security establishment driving decisions on war and peace during this crisis,” Ahmed Saeed, a former vice admiral in Pakistan’s navy and a defence analyst, told Al Jazeera.

Naqvi, the interior minister, has travelled to Tehran eight times since April without those visits producing a substantial breakthrough.

But unlike him, Munir is not a politician. He’s a general who appears to enjoy the trust of both the Iranian leadership and, crucially, Trump — who has described the Pakistani army chief as his “favourite field marshal”.

“The call [to Munir a few days ago] was initiated by Trump himself, requesting Pakistani leadership use its influence to bring Iran back to the table,” Saeed said.

Warm words, no movement

What Iranian officials actually told Munir, in accounts carried by Iranian state media, differed little from what they have been telling their own broadcasters all week.

“We distrust America, and it must change its behaviour,” Rezaei told Munir, according to IRNA.

Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliament speaker, was blunter.

“We are pursuing the implementation of the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding, and it is America that must adhere to its commitments based on the Memorandum of Understanding,” he told Munir, according to IRNA.

Pezeshkian, meanwhile, pressed Munir to tell Washington to “correct its tone and approach”, warning that “relying on force and bullying will only complicate the process”, according to Tasnim, another Iranian outlet.

Two tracks, one strait

Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad Albusaidi is also expected in Tehran today for a separate round of talks focused specifically on the Strait of Hormuz, a track that has run alongside Pakistan’s mediation for months.

Oman’s involvement is not new. Albusaidi has held recurring talks with Tehran on the strait’s navigation rules.

Ejaz Haider, a Lahore-based defence analyst, said the Omani and Pakistani diplomatic tracks complement each other.

“Oman and Islamabad channels complement, because clause 5 of the Islamabad MoU stresses a bilateral understanding on the strait [between Oman and Iran],” he told Al Jazeera. The Strait of Hormuz passes through the territorial waters of Iran and Oman.

“This [a deal between Iran and Oman to jointly manage the strait] is not in the interest of the US, which is why Trump has threatened to bomb Oman,” Haider said, referring to remarks Trump made on August 17, when he told Fox News he would bomb Oman if it “gets in the way” of reopening the strait, the second time he had threatened the US ally over Hormuz.

Where Islamabad’s advantage as a mediator lay was in its “direct access to Vahidi, Abdollahi and Rezaei, the actual architects of Iran’s decision-making”, Saeed, the former naval official, said.

An Iranian official close to the negotiations, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Albusaidi would be in Tehran “primarily to hear what Iran has decided and what it has discussed with its Pakistani mediator”.

Who holds the leverage?

Andreas Krieg, an associate professor of defence studies at King’s College London, said the differences that had emerged between the Iranian military and civilian leaderships demonstrate a gulf between their understanding of where the war stood.

Pezeshkian and Ghalibaf, Krieg said, were “essentially warning that Iran cannot live indefinitely in this condition”, while “parts of the IRGC believe the opposite and think time is working against Washington”.

But ultimately, he said, “Mohsen Rezaei, Ahmad Vahidi and the IRGC are central to whether any political understanding [to end the war] can be implemented”, referring to Iran’s top military leadership.

“[Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas] Araghchi can negotiate something, and Qatar can broker it, but none of that matters if the security apparatus does not accept the operational consequences.”

For now, Munir appears to be the candidate mediators believe has the best shot at getting Iranian generals from their war room to the board room.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announces new sanctions on Tehran to sever financial support for the regime, urging US allies to support the measures.

Iran security chief Rezaei says any state joining US would be considered an enemy and Tehran would target their interests in retaliation.

Omani and Iranian foreign ministers hold a call as Washington prepares economic sanctions amid ongoing shipping disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has called for an end to the months-long war with the United States, stating that Tehran holds a position of strength as diplomatic talks remain stalled.

“It is better that we bring the war to an end now as we are in a position of power and dignity,” Pezeshkian said in a meeting with doctors on Friday. “The whole world acknowledges our victory and emphasises that America has attacked our schools, hospitals and infrastructure in violation of all regulations and is hated around the world.”

Pezeshkian – whose authority as president is ultimately subordinate to Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei – also defended the June memorandum of understanding agreed with Washington against hardline domestic critics in parliament, who accused his administration of giving concessions to the US.

“They cannot find even a single clause in this agreement that indicates capitulation. All the commitments concern the other side,” he said.

However, days after the memorandum of understanding expired, Iran’s military leadership has warned that the country remains ready to strike back against any new threats.

“With preparedness across land, sea, air, air defence and cyberspace, Iran’s armed forces will respond to the enemy’s new threats with crushing, punishing and devastating responses,” Major-General Ali Abdollahi, chief of staff of Iran’s armed forces, was quoted as saying by Iranian media.

Strait of Hormuz

Meanwhile, Omani and Iranian foreign ministers discussed in a phone call on Friday ways to create suitable conditions for resuming dialogue and negotiations, as well as developments affecting navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, according to Oman’s state news agency.

Tehran continues to keep the key waterway partially shut while Washington persists with a naval counterblockade. Reports in US media indicate the US navy has been organising and protecting secret convoys of tankers through the southern sector of the strait, enabling between five and 10 million barrels a day of oil to be exported.

In Washington, President Donald Trump expressed scepticism over Tehran’s willingness to negotiate, telling reporters when asked if US military options with Iran were limited: “It just means that we’re seeing what happens.”

“We have total control of that entire region having to do with the Strait of Hormuz, and that means well into it, the land areas. So, they would love to make a deal, but they’re not ready to make the right deal, in my opinion,” Trump added.

He has also warned of economic consequences against any country that provides “any type of lifeline to Iran”.

The comments came as US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned that Washington would “collapse” the Iranian government with a sanctions campaign.

Bessent will hold a news conference at the Department of the Treasury on Monday, where he is expected to outline planned sanctions against Iran, marking a shift by the Trump administration towards economic rather than military pressure as the war nears the six-month mark.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has already condemned the US plan, accusing Washington of “economic terrorism” and stating that “the instigators of these sanctions are deserving of trial and punishment”.

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Lin Jian also criticised the US measures, stating that “sanctions and pressure will not help resolve the issue” and urging all parties to “take responsible measures and resolve the problem through political and diplomatic means”.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says Washington will impose its ‘toughest sanctions in history’ to ‘collapse’ Iran’s government, warning of consequences for countries that maintain economic ties with Tehran.

United States President Donald Trump has threatened to bomb Oman if it “gets in the way” of a peace deal between the US and Iran.

Oman is currently negotiating with Iran over the reopening of the critical Strait of Hormuz, while Iran has repeatedly stated that it will not speak directly to the US.

On Monday, as Iranian officials said they were close to announcing an agreement with Oman, a 60-day Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Washington and Tehran – which had provided for a period of peace talks but largely fell apart early on – expired with little hope for renewal.

This is not the first time Trump has threatened Oman, a US ally which has never entered into any direct conflict with the US. Oman, through whose territorial waters the contested Strait of Hormuz also flows, has positioned itself as a neutral party in the US-Iran war. Despite that, it has suffered a number of strikes by Iran, which has targeted US military assets and infrastructure around the region in retaliation for US-Israeli attacks.

Now, Trump is threatening to strike it as well.

Here is more about what Trump has threatened, and why.

What did Trump threaten Oman with?

Trump told US broadcaster Fox News on Monday that Iran should surrender, and claimed that his administration had opened a direct backchannel for talks with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

During the interview, he threatened to bomb US ally Oman if it “gets in the way” of US talks with Iran.

“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the s*** out of them,” he said.

An IRGC spokesman denied Trump’s claim of direct talks, telling Iran’s semi-official Tasnim News: “There are no talks taking place between IRGC officials and the Americans, and this lie by Trump is merely fantasies caused by the delusions and nightmares he has suffered as a result of defeat and desperation in the war.”

Has he threatened Oman before?

Monday was not the first time Trump threatened Oman over the course of the five-month war between the US and Iran. In May, he made a similar threat.

At a cabinet meeting on May 27, a reporter asked Trump what he thought about the idea of Oman and Iran jointly overseeing shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

“ Would you accept a short-term deal that allows Iran and Oman to control the strait?” the reporter asked.

Trump replied with a seemingly offhand threat. “Nobody is going to control it. It’s international waters, and Oman will behave just like everybody else, or we will have to blow them up.”

While there was initial speculation that Trump might have misspoken and said “Oman” instead of “Iran”, the US State Department later shared the comment on social media, with a transcript of the quote that referred to the Arab country.

What is the context for all this?

For the past few weeks, Iran and Oman have been engaged in direct talks, facilitated by mediators in Qatar, to reach an agreement over how to manage maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz in the future.

While Iran had agreed to keep the strait open to shipping without charge for 60 days following the signing of the MoU with the US on June 17, this quickly fell apart as the two sides disagreed over who had ultimate control over the strait – in particular which routes ships should take. Towards the end of June, Iran launched strikes on a number of ships which had followed an Oman-issued route, approved by the US, rather than its own route, and the US restarted strikes on Iran for nearly two weeks.

Following that, Iran refused to talk directly to the US, saying it had violated the terms of the MoU which included a cessation of hostilities on all fronts, and began talks with Oman over the future of the strait instead. Iran also issued a list of new demands relating to the lifting of sanctions and a permanent end to US strikes before it would resume talks, it said.

On Monday, Tehran said the two countries have reached an agreement on a new shipping route in the strait and are now preparing a joint declaration.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said the proposed mechanism for control of the strait seeks to protect the interests of both Iran and Oman while allowing commercial shipping to pass through.

“This is the first time that a mechanism is being developed to simultaneously safeguard the sovereign rights of the two littoral states and ensure the safe passage of commercial vessels,” said Baghaei.

The Strait of Hormuz is a critical waterway through which one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies were shipped before the US-Israel war on Iran began on February 28. Roughly 130 ships sailed through the strait each day.

Iran closed the strait in early March, allowing only a few ships it deemed “friendly” to pass through the strait until it signed the MoU with the US on June 17. Since then, it has become the key issue holding up talks for a lasting peace plan to end the war on Iran.

The US, meanwhile, has established its own blockade on Iranian ports in and around the strait. Last week, it fired on a Panama-flagged cargo vessel it accused of attempting to reach Iranian ports and which, it said, had failed to follow orders to change course.

The crisis has triggered global energy shortages and the price of oil has soared. The price of Brent crude, the global benchmark, was about $66 a barrel just before the Middle East conflict began. Over the course of the war, the price has surged past $100 on several occasions, most recently on July 23. In March, the price rose as high as $119.

Global benchmark Brent crude futures rose to $91.22 a barrel on Tuesday, inching close to a three-week high.

What is Oman’s position on the Iran war?

Oman, which is known for its neutrality, has not publicly stated that it intends to join Iran in controlling the Strait of Hormuz. The US and Oman are close partners with a relationship stretching back nearly 200 years.

The two countries have multiple cooperation treaties, including security partnerships, a free trade agreement and a science and technology deal.

During the war, Iran launched multiple strikes on US military assets and energy infrastructure in neighbouring countries, including Oman.

Oman previously acted as a key mediator between Washington and Tehran as they sought a resolution to the war that began on February 28, when the US and Israel attacked Iran.

So, why is Trump threatening Oman now?

A potential Iran-Oman understanding covering the Strait of Hormuz could cut against one of Washington’s core demands: that Iran relinquish control of the strait as a condition of ending the war. Rather than curbing that control, such a deal would lend it greater legitimacy by formalising Iran’s position.

But experts say Trump is also likely angry that the US has seemingly been cut out of the deal relating to the strait.

“In part, a solution mediated without US intervention and which in fact allows Oman and Iran to manage passage through Hormuz, which lies entirely within the two countries’ territorial waters, would show how impotent the United States is and has been,” Laleh Khalili, a professor of Gulf studies at the University of Exeter, told Al Jazeera.

The US and Iran have also strongly disagreed about whether Iran should be allowed to charge fees to shipping companies using the strait. Under international law, tolls for passing through natural waterways such as Hormuz are forbidden, even when they are not technically in international waters. However, fees for services such as insurance, environmental protection and docking can be charged. It has yet to be seen whether this issue will be addressed in an Iran-Oman agreement.

In late July, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned that Iran should not be allowed to charge tolls on vessels traversing Hormuz. Days earlier, Trump himself pledged there would be no tolls for passage through the strait, unless they are collected by his own country.

On August 14, Trump went a step further, telling his supporters in New York that he had plans to declare the Strait of Hormuz a “territory” of the US. “After we finish defeating Iran, which is being very badly defeated, pretty soon I’ll be declaring the Hormuz Strait a territory of the United States,” Trump said.

Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, responded to that threat on social media with defiance.

“Trump said that, after Iran’s defeat, he will soon declare the Strait of Hormuz as American territory,” Gharibabadi wrote.

“The Strait of Hormuz cannot be taken over by a tweet, nor by an aircraft carrier, nor by issuing a decree, nor by an election speech. Iran is neither afraid of threats nor intimidated by a show of force.”

Aug. 17 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump threatened Monday to bomb Oman if the nation’s leaders get “in the way of” any potential Iran deal with the United States.

“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the [expletive] out of them,” Trump told Fox News.

Oman is not part of the U.S. conflict with Iran, but Omani negotiators have been speaking with Iran over a deal between the two Middle Eastern nations to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Esmail Baghaei, a spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, said Monday that Oman and Iran had reached an understanding about a map of the transit route in the waterway. About a third of the world’s crude oil passes through the strait.

Iranian officials have previously said that they’ll reopen the strait only after the United States ends its naval blockade of Iran’s ports and stops attacking Iran. They’ve also requested the end of sanctions and compensation for damage from the attacks.

A two-month window to negotiate peace with Iran, established in the June “memorandum of understanding” between the United States and Iran, officially ended Monday with no progress. The two countries have also strikes for more than a month despite the agreement. Trump told Fox News on Monday that he is “in no hurry” to reach a permanent deal.

“I have no time schedule,” Trump said. The president has repeatedly said that the conflict will end “soon” and promised imminent peace deals that haven’t come to fruition. He also said in the interview that Iran should “put up the white flag of surrender” and denied reports that the United States munitions have been depleted.

Trump previously threatened to “blow up” Oman in May during a Cabinet meeting. On Friday, he threatened to make the Strait of Hormuz “a territory of the United States.”

US president’s words come as Treasury chief says US will use economic measures against Iran that have ‘never been seen’.

A salvage operation is under way to stabilise the stricken tanker behind a major oil spill off Oman, the risk management company coordinating the effort has said.

The announcement by Ambrey on Thursday came a day after Oman’s environmental authority confirmed that oil from the Caroline Bezengi had reached beaches along the sultanate’s central coast.

The tanker, a suspected member of Russia’s shadow fleet used to transport sanctioned Russian oil, has been leaking crude into waters near the Hallaniyat archipelago since June, when the ship’s crew reported an unidentified explosion.

Ambrey said it was working with Omani authorities and that its services had been engaged as part of a “significant international response” that included salvage vessels, aircraft and specialist personnel.

Apart from Oman and an unnamed “leading international oil spill response company”, Ambrey did not elaborate on which other countries or firms were involved in the effort to salvage the vessel, which has flown the flags of states including Cameroon, Palau and Liberia.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) – the United Nations maritime agency – said on Thursday that it was “closely monitoring” the situation and would “continue to support ongoing efforts”, without providing further details.

The International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds, a pair of intergovernmental organisations established to provide compensation for oil pollution, said it would not be involved in the cleanup operation after determining that the incident likely resulted from an act of war.

Ambrey, based in Hereford in the United Kingdom, said it expected salvage vessels to reach the Caroline Bezengi soon and that specialist personnel had already boarded the vessel to begin stabilising its cargo.

Ed Wollaston, director of global response at Ambrey, said the “extremely challenging situation” had been complicated by adverse weather from the annual Khareef monsoon.

“However, we have deployed the leading experts in each aspect of the response and have mobilised the appropriate supporting equipment, aircraft and vessels,” Wollaston said in a statement.

“We are working around the clock to mitigate the environmental impact of the situation.”

The oil spill has expanded dramatically in size over the past week, according to analyses of satellite imagery, raising fears for coastlines and ecosystems in the region, including a marine reserve established last year off the Hallaniyat archipelago.

Environmental NGO Greenpeace said on Thursday that, based on satellite imagery, the spill had grown from 45 square kilometres (17sq miles) in late July to about 1,300sq kilometres (502sq miles) as of Wednesday.

Omani authorities as recently as Monday estimated the size of the spill at approximately 400sq kilometres (154sq miles).

Hanen Keskes, Greenpeace’s head of campaigns for the MENA region, said the circumstances of the spill made it “especially challenging” to respond to.

“Given the scale of this – a damaged tanker in a remote location, during monsoon season, with no clear owner or verified insurer to compel a rapid response – this is a case where international assistance should be mobilised urgently,” Keskes told Al Jazeera.

“Capabilities like specialised salvage equipment and expertise can exceed what any one country has on hand, and every day of delay allows more oil to disperse.”

Najmedin Meshkati, an expert in oil spills and a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Southern California, said that authorities should have moved faster to contain the spill.

“That two-month interval was the response window, and it closed. In spill response, source control on day three is worth many multiples of source control on day 60,” Meshkati told Al Jazeera.

Meshkati acknowledged, however, that Omani authorities had been dealt a difficult situation.

“It was handed an orphaned wreck with no responsive owner, no verifiable insurer, no functioning flag state, and a compensation regime containing a war exclusion that may void it entirely,” Meshkati said.

“No mid-sized maritime administration on earth is resourced for that. But that is precisely the argument for escalating harder and earlier.”

Damilola S Olawuyi, a professor of energy and environmental law at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, said the spill highlighted the need for stronger international mechanisms to hold polluters accountable.

“The obligation of the entity responsible for pollution to pay for the cost of cleanup and remediation, ie, the polluter pays principle, has for long been a bedrock of international law,” Olawuyi told Al Jazeera.

“However, in an era of increasing geopolitical realignments, identifying the responsible polluter has become complex, therefore complicating effective risk reduction, response and remediation measures,” he said.

A vast oil spill from a leaking tanker reached Oman’s coastline on Wednesday, its environment agency said.

This oil spill threatens to become one of the world’s worst in years after spreading largely unchecked for several weeks, experts say.

On Monday, Oman said it was working to contain the spill, which had by then affected roughly 390 square kilometres (150sq miles), according to analysis by the country’s environment agency.

The slick now covers an area of more than 2,000sq km (770sq miles), said John Amos, an oil spill specialist who reviewed satellite imagery obtained by Reuters. It could affect about 40km (25 miles) of coast near Ras Madraka, as well as Masirah Island, Oman’s Environment Authority said.

Here’s what we know.

What happened?

Oil has been leaking from the tanker Caroline Bezengi since it ran aground about 22 nautical miles (41km) from the Omani coastal town of Sharbithat some time after the crew reported a suspected explosion on June 8. It had been en route from Russia to India.

Reuters reported that the tanker was carrying an estimated 800,000 barrels of sanctioned oil and that it ran aground on June 30.

An investigation by the news agency AFP found that the ship had been stranded for several weeks near Oman’s al-Qibliyyah Island.

In the meantime, the oil has been spreading towards Oman’s coastline.

The Oman News Agency (ONA) quoted the country’s environment authority saying that “today’s monitoring results showed that some beaches in the Ras Madrakah area were affected by oil pollution”.

The Indian Ocean town sits about 200km (125 miles) from al-Qibliyyah.

The slick is now concentrated around the Hallaniyat Archipelago off the southern coast, where a marine reserve was established last year to protect sensitive ecosystems home to diverse marine life, including rare sea turtles.

On Wednesday, the ONA reported that “a coastal stretch of up to 40 km in the [Ras Madrakah] area is expected to be affected”.

The southern beaches of Masirah Island, which lies 15km (nine miles) off the coast of Oman, could be contaminated “in the coming hours”, affecting a 10-20km (six-to-12-mile) stretch of coastline, it said.

An unnamed spokesperson for the United Nations International Maritime Organization said it was “closely monitoring” the leakage.

How did this happen?

British maritime security company Vanguard told AFP that the tanker had suffered “explosions” in early June as it sailed off the coast of Yemen, causing water to enter several sections of the vessel. It ran aground off the coast of Oman some time after this.

There has been no official explanation for the explosions and no party has claimed an attack. However, the vessel was navigating two separate wars on its journey from Russia to India. Tankers have been frequently targeted in the Gulf region in recent months as the US war on Iran has continued.

In April, the Caroline Bezengi sailed from the Russian port of Novorossiysk on the Black Sea, a flashpoint in the Russia-Ukraine war.

It is believed to be part of Russia’s “shadow fleet” used to circumvent Western sanctions on its oil exports. It last sailed under a Cameroonian flag.

Rentoor Shipmanagement and Villar Shipmanagement, both based in China, are registered as the ship’s owner and operator, respectively, according to the open-source database OpenSanctions.

Russia’s shadow fleet includes ageing vessels that have often been criticised for poor maintenance, lack of insurance and lacklustre safety standards.

Ukraine has previously carried out assaults on shadow fleet vessels believed to be carrying Russian oil.

The Caroline Bezengi then passed through the Suez Canal at the end of May, ship-tracking data shows, before sailing through the Red Sea and past Yemen, where the Iran-aligned Houthi fighters have entered a wider regional war between the United States, Israel and Iran and are targeting Saudi Arabia-flagged ships.

What damage could the oil spill cause?

Last week, advocacy group Greenpeace warned that the spill was on the verge of causing an “environmental disaster”.

Christopher D’Elia, a specialist in oil spills and a professor emeritus at Louisiana State University in the United States, told Al Jazeera the estimated 800,000 barrels of crude on board the Caroline Bezengi would amount to a “fairly large spill”.

“This spill raises a lot of issues,” D’Elia told Al Jazeera.

“These illegal tankers don’t comply with the ‘polluter pays’ principle that is the basis for how the US and other developed nations regulate spills,” D’Elia said.

“The ‘responsible party’ must finance the cleanup in the US. In this case, there is no responsible party.”

Meanwhile, Iranian media reported on Wednesday that a separate oil spill in the Strait of Hormuz had reached the island of Qeshm, affecting beaches and an environmentally sensitive mangrove forest.

State-run news agency IRNA said the slick had affected areas on Qeshm’s southern coast, as well as parts of the smaller neighbouring island of Hengam.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said pollution had been observed at three locations and on the sea surface, adding that its source seemed to be a “foreign bulk carrier”, without specifying the name of the ship.

The risk of oil spills in the Gulf has risen sharply because of strikes on tankers during the five-month US-Iran war. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has reported 65 incidents in the Strait of Hormuz and across the Middle East since the beginning of March.

“Any party that benefits from commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz is legally and morally obligated to take action to compensate for and remedy the environmental damage caused to the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman,” he said.

Iran continues to deny claims by the United States that it controls the Strait of Hormuz as talks aimed at negotiating a peace deal between the two sides falter.

US President Donald Trump repeated his claim that the US is in “total control” of the critical waterway on Wednesday, but was met with angry denials from Iran, which has stated that it will not reopen the strait until demands regarding US aggression, reparations and sanctions are met.

“Claims and repeated posts by US officials that the Strait of Hormuz is no longer blocked do not change the reality,” Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) posted on X on Wednesday.

“The Strait of Hormuz remains blocked and will not be reopened until Iran’s conditions are accepted,” it added.

Here’s what we know about the latest developments in the strait, through which one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are shipped during peacetime, and the prospects for ongoing talks.

What’s the latest on the US-Iran standoff?

Iranian forces are currently preventing ships that do not have its express approval from navigating through the narrow strait, which passes through territorial waters of Iran and Oman.

Despite Trump’s claim that the US has control over the strait, shipping traffic through the key waterway has dropped to a one-week low as a result of Iran’s blockade.

Meanwhile, the US is operating a naval blockade on Iranian ports both in and around the strait. On Tuesday, US forces targeted a Panama-flagged vessel they said was headed for an Iranian port, in the Gulf of Oman, and which they alleged had failed to respond to warnings.

On Thursday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the US “has long miscalculated due to intelligence failures”, including when launching its war on Iran, which it did alongside Israel with strikes on Tehran on February 28.

In a post on X, Araghchi said Washington’s actions in the Strait of Hormuz were “an even bigger miscalculation”.

“Worse than fake news is fake intelligence,” he said.

Hojjatoleslam Hossein Taeb, the commander of the paramilitary Basij Organisation – an affiliate of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – reiterated that the strait is “under Iran’s control and management”.

“Today you see that the Strait of Hormuz is under the management and control of the Islamic Republic, and our country continues on its path in complete security,” Taeb said on Thursday, according to Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency.

“The Americans saw the power of the Islamic revolution,” he added.

What do we know about Iran-Oman talks?

Iran says it is not talking directly to the US about the strait. Instead, it says it is holding talks with Oman, which it proposes to share in the future management of the strait.

Following the signing of a memorandum of understanding between Iran and the US on June 17, under which Iran undertook to keep the strait open for 60 days, there were soon disagreements about control of the waterway and the routes that ships should take. Iran fired on some ships it said had not followed its permitted route, leading to a renewal of hostilities with the US.

Iran also disagreed with the US over whether it could charge fees to ships passing through the strait. As a result, the strait – which was fully and freely open to all shipping before the US launched its war on Iran – has become the main obstacle to the progression of wider peace talks.

Now, talks between Iran and Oman are aimed at ironing out these issues.

On Tuesday, Qatar said negotiations between Iran and Oman over the strait had reached “an advanced stage”.

“As mediators, we want the Strait of Hormuz reopened as soon as possible,” Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed al-Ansari said during a news conference.

Negotiators are trying to reach a compromise that would allow commercial shipping to resume while addressing the security concerns of both Iran and Oman.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman has said talks with Oman are focused on “establishing safe inbound and outbound shipping lanes” that “uphold sovereign rights while also addressing the national security considerations of both Iran and Oman”.

Last week, Iran said it had agreed on the coordinates for these shipping lanes with Oman.

What do we know about broader peace talks between Iran and the US?

Iran says it is not speaking directly to the US because it has violated the June 17 MoU by restarting strikes on Iran in July.

Now, Pakistan is making efforts to mediate peace talks. It said on Tuesday it was working to bring the US and Iran “to the negotiating table”, as Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi held talks with senior Iranian officials in Tehran.

In April, the US and Iran held face-to-face negotiations, with US Vice President JD Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf attending talks in Islamabad. On June 17, the two sides remotely signed the MoU, which was supposed to kick-start a 60-day negotiation process. However, various disagreements prevented that process from getting off the ground, and talks have stalled since then.

Alan Eyre, a distinguished diplomatic fellow with the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC, told Al Jazeera earlier this month that the only important negotiations taking place right now are Iran-Oman talks over the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran says it is not worth talking directly because it “can’t count on anything the US says”, Eyre said.

Commenting on the possibility of future talks between the longtime foes, Negar Mortazavi, senior fellow at the US-based Center for International Policy, said the key question is whether the escalatory rhetoric from both sides is “opening negotiating positions or actual red lines”.

“If both sides are prepared to compromise, there is still a path towards ending the conflict and reopening the strait,” Mortazavi told Al Jazeera on Wednesday.

“If they are not, Hormuz could remain restricted, and the confrontation risks becoming another prolonged, open-ended conflict in the Middle East.”

What are the latest demands from Iran and the US?

At the end of last week, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council set out new conditions it says the US must meet before the Strait of Hormuz can fully reopen.

The six conditions include an end to US threats against Iran and insults to what Zolghadr described as the country’s national and religious values; a permanent end to attacks against Iran and its allies in Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen and Iraq; the lifting of the US naval blockade and withdrawal of naval and air forces from around Iran; compensation for damage from what he called two “imposed wars”; the lifting of sanctions; and the unconditional release of frozen Iranian assets.

Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday that his administration was going to seek payment for “50 years” of damage caused by Iran, framing the move as a direct response to Tehran’s claims.

The payments, he said, would cover deaths among US forces in the region as well as civilian protesters in Iran, claiming that 52,000 people have been killed in Iran in the past four months. Tehran says some 3,117 people died in antigovernment protests that swept the country in January, prior to the launch of the US-Israel war. In February, the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) reported about 7,000 deaths, including 6,500 protesters.

On Thursday, Al Jazeera’s Tohid Assidi reported, citing observers, that Iran is focused on two primary issues.

“First was the security assurances Iran sought, ensuring that a reached deal could pave the way for a period of stability in the country,” Assidi said.

“Second were economic concerns, primarily articulated in demands for the US naval blockade to be removed and sanctions frozen, which represented the key demands coming from the Iranian side,” he added.

Despite the rhetoric from Trump, analysts have told Al Jazeera that the US may have to concede to some of Iran’s demands as it faces growing pressure domestically to avoid another escalation.

The US media have reported that concerns over dwindling defensive munitions have contributed to Trump’s decision not to carry out his threatened large-scale strikes against Iran.

President Trump again insists the US has ‘total control’ of the strait, while Tehran is resolute that Washington must meet its demands.

The deaths on board the Egyptian-owned Tihamah mark first shipping deaths linked to Houthis since the US-Israel war on Iran began.

Yemen’s internationally recognised government has accused the Houthi rebel group of killing at least six people and wounding 10 others in a double-tap strike on a cargo vessel in the Bab al-Mandeb strait.

The attack on the Egyptian-owned Tihamah on Tuesday marks the first shipping deaths linked to the Iran-aligned Houthis since the United States and Israel launched the war on Iran on February 28.

Yemen’s Transport Ministry said three Pakistani nationals and one Indonesian national were killed after the Houthis fired three ballistic missiles at the commercial ship, sparking a fire and causing “significant damage” to the vessel.

Yemen’s coastguard said in a separate statement that the Houthis fired another missile at the ship as rescue personnel were evacuating the dead and wounded.

“The attack struck the site of the rescue operation and resulted in deaths and injuries among the forces participating in the response operation,” the coastguard said.

At least two troops were killed in the second strike.

Ten people were wounded in total, including seven crew members, it added.

Houthi-Saudi truce unravels

Yemen’s Foreign Ministry condemned the attack and called on the international community “to move from condemnation to effective and decisive action” against the Houthis.

There was no official comment from the Houthis.

But the Houthi-run news agency Saba reported that the ‌group had attacked a Saudi ship carrying military equipment in Bab al-Mandeb. It did not name the ship, and there was no immediate Saudi response to the report.

In a separate incident on Tuesday, the US military said it fired on a ship attempting to break its blockade of Iranian ports in the Gulf of Oman. The US Central Command said a Navy helicopter fired two Hellfire missiles at the Panama-flagged Vela Nova cargo vessel, but did not say if any crew members were wounded.

The escalation in Yemen follows the collapse of a years-long truce in the country’s civil war between the Houthis and the Saudi-backed, internationally recognised government.

The breakdown of the United Nations-backed 2022 truce followed a Saudi air strike on the runway of Sanaa airport on July 13, preventing the landing of an Iranian flight carrying a high-ranking Houthi delegation.

The Houthis then attacked the Abha airport in southwestern Saudi Arabia and announced a blockade on Saudi shipping in the Red Sea. They have also attacked Saudi vessels as well as oil facilities in the kingdom, adding further disruption to the global economy.

The Saudi-led coalition, in turn, has struck Houthi-controlled Hodeidah and Kamaran, Yemen’s largest island in the Red Sea.

The Houthis have also launched attacks on government-held areas in Yemen, including the port city of al-Makha (Mocha) on the Red Sea and the central city of Marib, killing dozens of troops and civilians.

Yemen’s internationally recognised government on Tuesday said the Houthis launched 10 missiles and four drones during a series of further attacks on sites on the country’s western coast.

The Houthis said they had launched ballistic missile and drone attacks “targeting Saudi military buildups, weapons depots and command posts” in al-Makha and the central Marib province.

The UN has called for restraint, saying the renewed hostilities risk “drawing the country into a broader regional confrontation, with devastating consequences for its people”.

Qatar says negotiations between Oman and Iran over the future of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz are making major progress.

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s authorities are weighing a finalised arrangement with Oman over the Strait of Hormuz, but top officials maintain that the strategic waterway’s full reopening will hinge on concessions from the United States.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Saturday said the agreement with Oman was “very close”, but cautioned that a full reopening of the strait would depend on the US staying true to commitments given as part of a June memorandum of understanding (MoU) that were violated.

Iran has previously slammed the US for backing a southern Omani route in the waterway without coordination with Tehran, not halting Israel’s attacks on Lebanon, and refusing to unfreeze any of Iran’s money blocked abroad due to sanctions.

Separately on Saturday, Hossein Mohebbi, spokesperson for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), told state media the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz “has its own specific mechanism and has nothing to do with the negotiations between Iran and Oman”.

He added the US will have no choice but to accede to “conditions” set by the Islamic republic to reopen the strategic strait, which Mohebbi said the IRGC views as not just an economic waterway, but a source of power tied to Iran’s geographical position that it intends to leverage.

The IRGC spokesman urged the administration of US President Donald Trump not to “interfere” in the talks with Oman, “which have nearly reached their conclusion”.

On Friday, the spokesperson for the national security commission of Iran’s hardline-dominated parliament also confirmed that the framework of an arrangement with Oman over the strait had been agreed upon, and a deal could be expected soon.

Hassan Qashqavi said the decision was pending a green light from “higher levels”.

In a televised interview, President Masoud Pezeshkian said he would “strongly defend” the MoU signed with the US in June and once again rejected speculation that he would abandon his office, despite claims by hardliners that he has used the threat of resignation as a way of combatting opponents who are against a diplomatic resolution with the US.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said earlier that a joint statement could be expected with Oman if a deal is reached to bring back some traffic to the strait, which has been mostly disrupted since the US and Israel attacked Iran on February 28.

Iran and Oman have agreed on the coordinates of routes to be taken by vessels through the waterway as part of the arrangement. Inbound traffic is to pass through a northern lane through Iranian territorial waters, while outbound traffic will go through a southern lane in Omani waters, coordinated with Iran.

US media have said the interim agreement is envisaged for 60 days and can be extended. They have also reported on discussions concerning naval mine clearance from a central corridor that could be utilised in the future, the passage of military vessels and a potential coordinated fee system for passing vessels.

There are questions over what will happen with a US naval blockade of Iran’s southern ports and a drawback of US military assets, which Iran has said will be necessary on the way to fully reopening the strait, through which about 20 percent of the world’s oil passes in peacetime.

Even more ambiguous are prospects of a broader long-term resolution that will also address the future of Iran’s nuclear programme, as well as years of harsh US sanctions over nuclear enrichment that have exacerbated economic shockwaves imposed against 90 million Iranians.

In the meantime, while military activity has significantly dropped across the region to give space to the Oman talks, tensions remain high and maritime security continues to dominate discussions.

The United Arab Emirates said a vessel belonging to the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) was targeted by a missile while crossing the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday, but that there were no casualties.

In a statement, the UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said targeting commercial shipping and using the strait “as a tool of economic coercion or blackmail represents acts of piracy” by the IRGC “and constitutes a direct threat to the stability of the region, its peoples, and global energy security”.

The Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen also continue to face off against Saudi Arabia and create disruptions for Saudi-linked vessels in the Red Sea and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait.

On Friday, the Houthis launched a deadly attack on an area of Marib controlled by the Saudi-backed, internationally recognised Yemeni government, with the government announcing a military response on several fronts on Saturday.

The Yemeni group also struck southwestern Saudi Arabia’s Najran on Thursday, a day after claiming two separate attacks on Saudi oil tankers.

Traffic in both the Bab al-Mandeb and Hormuz straits was down to just a handful of vessels on Wednesday on the back of the latest escalations, but has relatively rebounded while still far from unobstructed pre-war levels. Some ships have resorted to turning off their transponders to avoid being detected.

Global energy markets have once again welcomed the increasing prospects of a diplomatic agreement that could positively affect the Strait of Hormuz, with Brent crude standing at about $83 per barrel at Friday’s close.

Markets inside Iran also reacted positively on Saturday, the first day of the working week in Iran, with the national currency strengthening to 1.85 million rials against the US dollar, slightly recovering from all-time lows of about 1.94 million reached last week.

The main index of the Tehran Stock Exchange also climbed by 112,000 points or just over 2 percent to reach 5.52 million, near an all-time high.

The Saudi, Pakistan, Turkiye defence pact faces mixed reactions, with some Iranian officials doubting its security guarantees. Iran and Oman agree on a Hormuz framework, while fighting in Yemen escalates between government forces and Houthis.
Al Jazeera’s @Mohammadfff_ reports.