Iran And Oman Working To Control Strait Of Hormuz, Shaky Ceasefire Still Holding
Iran and Oman are reportedly closing in on a deal that would give the Islamic Republic full control over ships entering the Strait of Hormuz. This comes as a tenuous pause in fighting between the U.S. and Iran enters a sixth day and a day after U.S. President Donald Trump insisted that Iran would fully open the vital chokepoint today or face new and more intense attacks that would include powerplants, other civilian infrastructure and even strikes on leadership. Iran largely closed the Strait after it was hit by the U.S. and Israel on Feb. 28. The American leader is pushing a rekindled effort to find a diplomatic off-ramp to a conflict that has killed 18 American troops, wounded hundreds more, drained U.S. weapons stocks and roiled international relations and global financial markets.
Highlighting the precarious nature of vessel transits through this narrow passage between Iran and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), another ship was struck by Iran overnight as it was leaving the Strait, a maritime security official told TWZ.
The Gulf of Oman, which is the eastern approach to the Strait and the Persian Gulf, is largely controlled by Iran to the north and Oman to the south. Under the emerging agreement between those countries, “vessels heading into the Persian Gulf will transit a channel controlled by Iran, and close to its coast. Ships leaving the Gulf will travel on a channel near Oman,” The New York Times reported.
Both Iran and the U.S. are already following this general traffic pattern, with the U.S. Navy recommending transits close to the Omani coastline and Iran pushing shipping toward its shores. The middle of the Strait has been deemed too hazardous because of the threat primarily from mines. The new plan being pushed by Iran and Oman would expand the use of these traffic patterns. Unless there is some special cutout made in the deal, it could require the U.S. Navy to seek permission to enter the Persian Gulf and then have to make the transit deep in Iranian waters, giving American warships degraded defensive options and putting them in the heart of Iran’s weapons engagement envelope.
While Iranian officials say that they won’t impose tolls, the accord does include a charge for service fees to cover the environmental impact of the shipping, security for the cargo ships and tankers, and staffing, the publication added. Revenues would be divided equally between Iran and Oman, two Iranian officials told the Times.
Reuters reported on Tuesday that “Tehran is unlikely to change its position,” because it has already shown flexibility by moving from its initial position of seeking full control over traffic in both directions in the strait.
But a U.S. official familiar with the negotiations told the Times on Monday that the Iranian account was “not accurate,” and said that any “temporary” routes established through the strait would not involve approvals or permissions by Iran, and would involve no tolls.
If this sounds familiar, there is good reason. We wrote about a similar scheme that was floated by Iran and Oman back in May. And, just like now, it came during a lull in fighting and as Trump insisted the Strait be open for all with no fees for transit.
Regardless of the plans for the Strait being discussed by Iran and Oman, the Trump administration on Tuesday said it could soon work out a deal with Iran on the matter.
“We are in talks with the Iranians,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “There is a chance we may have a deal today or tomorrow to open the Strait and move towards a more normalized position in this conflict.”
“It would be freedom of movement,” the Treasury Secretary said when asked whether Iran would be allowed to charge a toll.
All this follows Trump’s claims on Monday that talks with Iran were ongoing and that he is giving Tehran a “last chance” before ordering new strikes. Iranian officials, however, vociferously denied Trump’s claim and said they are prepared to fight.
“We’re talking, and we’re talking at the request of Iran, backed by Saudi Arabia, backed by UAE and backed by Qatar in particular, but others also,” Trump told reporters Monday at the White House. “They all wanted to give this a last chance. This is a last chance. This is not something that if it doesn’t happen. This is the last chance for them.”
On Sunday, Trump stated that he called off a major attack on Iran to give diplomacy another chance to work. Asked Monday what his message to the American people is now that he has called off strikes at least five times, Trump replied: “Well, you don’t know, I don’t know, I think we’re going to maybe get something. But I want to give them every last chance before decapitation. Very tough to do what we have planned, still planned. We’ll see what happens.”
Hours before Trump spoke at the White House, Iranians dismissed both the notion of ongoing talks and U.S. control of the Strait.
“We currently have no negotiations with the United States,” Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmail Baqaei told reporters, according to the official Iranian Fars news agency. “Instead, we are working, in consultation with Oman, to determine a route for vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz at the earliest opportunity. This arrangement is naturally temporary and is intended to ensure the safety of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.”
Responding to claims that Pakistani and Qatari representatives were involved in negotiations with the United States, Baqaei said, “I am not aware of any such matter. We are neither expecting to host a delegation in the coming days nor planning to send one abroad.”
The Iranians appear to be coalescing around hardliners from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. One Israeli journalist suggested that Supreme Leader “Mojtaba Khamenei has given IRGC Commander Ahmad Vahidi the final say on all key decisions regarding the United States.”
This is an outcome we predicted before Epic Fury was launched.
As we noted earlier in this piece, amid debate over control of the Strait, Iran struck the Liberian-flagged bulk carrier Minoan Pioneer with an unknown projectile near the Oman coast, a maritime security official told us.
The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center (UKMTO) stated on X that it “received a military-source report of a mayday from a vessel. A second vessel relayed that the first vessel was struck by an unknown projectile in its engine room and crew accommodations.”
“One crew member was reported missing and the remaining crew evacuated safely, UKMTO added. “A fire was reported, the vessel lost power and required assistance. The vessel was last reported at anchor. UKMTO has been unable to contact the vessel.”
Meanwhile, United States Central Command (CENTCOM) still enforces a blockade of Iranian ports, an operation that remains a sticking point in the negotiation process.
“As of Aug. 3, CENTCOM has redirected 44 commercial vessels, disabled 2, and boarded 2,” the command stated on X Monday afternoon.
As the U.S. continues to maintain a large presence in the region, another report emerged highlighting the immense expenditure of munitions during this conflict.
The U.S. Army has “used up much of its stockpile of highly accurate long-range missiles” since Epic Fury was launched on Feb. 28, Reuters reported, citing three people familiar with the data.
The missiles are principally the Army’s surface-to-surface weapons, known as Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM). The U.S. has used “virtually all” of these weapons, according to two of the sources. The sources all declined to say how many of each munition the U.S. had left.
Supply figures on ATACMS and PrSMs “circulated inside the federal government over the last week during tense conversations inside the Trump administration about how much longer the U.S. can continue striking Iran without drawing down the stockpile to levels that would limit the military’s ability to respond to crises elsewhere,” Reuters added.
Several days earlier, “the top U.S. general in Europe privately warned the Pentagon…that he lacks sufficient naval forces to continue protecting Israel from incoming ballistic missiles,” The Washington Post reported.
Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, the head of U.S. European Command, “sent written notification to senior Pentagon officials saying that without another Navy destroyer he will be forced to choose defense of the United States ‘homeland’ over that of Israel, said the officials,” the Post stated. “A U.S. defense official said Grynkewich’s notification appears consistent with past outreach to the Pentagon from the military’s top generals when they see certain risks that require Washington’s consideration. This can occur, the official said, as commanders compete for finite resources and weapons.”
The depletion of ATACMS and PrSMs and Grynkewich’s notification come amid growing concerns over the supply of munitions, especially air defense interceptors. The lack of sufficient magazine depth is an issue that TWZ has raised frequently for years, and especially in regard to America’s air and missile defenses, in particular. In fact, we laid out in detail these exact concerns and how they would be a major issue in war with Iran just prior to the conflict starting in a feature you can read in full here.
Meanwhile, fighting between the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels of Yemen and Saudi Arabia continues.
The Houthis, who have already struck Saudi ships and refineries after imposing a blockade on the Bab al-Mandab Strait (BAM), on Tuesday said they struck Najran Airport using a drone.
“This targeting comes in response to the Saudi enemy’s violation of the airspace in the provinces of Saada and Hajjah using its drones,” Houthi spokesman Yahya Saree claimed on X. “We affirm to the Saudi enemy that any violation of our airspace will not go unpunished or without retaliation.”
There was no immediate confirmation about the attack from the Saudis. The Houthis often exaggerate or make up claims and TWZ cannot independently verify this one.
However, Saudi ship transits through the BAM are now almost non-existent since the Houthis imposed their blockade, according to the Windward maritime intelligence firm.
“Crossings fell to a lower baseline after the July 20 Houthi threat announcement, driven almost entirely by the collapse in Saudi-linked traffic,” Windward noted on X. “Non-Saudi vessels have held steady for two weeks at an average of 37 crossings per day — roughly 22% below pre-announcement levels. Saudi-linked crossings dropped to just 0.86 per day last week, the lowest recorded so far, with zero crossings on three of the seven days.” The threat “is functioning as a selective pressure on Riyadh’s Red Sea export route rather than a blanket corridor shutdown,” Windward added. “This matters because Saudi Arabia had already shifted significant volumes to Yanbu and the Red Sea to bypass Hormuz. That alternative is now under direct commercial strain.”
As we have frequently detailed, a Houthi blockade of the BAM threatens to add far greater pressure on oil exports from the Middle East, already drastically affected by the Iranian closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the resumption of the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports. Asia in particular relies on these shipments. The Yemeni rebel group has expanded its target set, hitting oil terminals and infrastructure Saudi Arabia is using to pump supplies to tankers in the Red Sea. The kingdom has diverted millions of barrels of oil per day through pipelines to its Yanbu port on the Red Sea in an effort to minimize the energy shortages due to the hostilities in the Persian Gulf. Even with the BAM closed, oil exports could still head to the West, via the Suez Canal.
But if the infrastructure used to convey these energy products is put out of action, the consequences could be even more severe, with far less or even no energy supplies from Saudi Arabia moving out of the Red Sea. The closing of the BAM also raised the specter of the U.S. having to get as involved as it did during the previous Houthi campaign against shipping that ended last September, which could pull resources away from Iranian-focused operations.
Though there is conflict in two regions of the Middle East, an expansion to Ukraine appears to have been avoided.
Major General Mohsen Rezaei, military adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader, claimed on Monday that Tehran was prepared to launch a strike against Ukraine in retaliation for a Ukrainian attack on an Iranian ship in the Caspian Sea last month.
However, that was called off after Ukraine apologized, Rezaei reportedly claimed.
The situation dates back to July 26, when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reported a successful long-range strike on a ship in the Caspian Sea that, according to him, was being used to transport military cargo to Russia. Iran accused Ukraine of attacking a civilian vessel in the Caspian Sea, claiming that one sailor was killed and another wounded.
That’s it for now. We’ll update this story when new details emerge.
Contact the author: howard@twz.com