Trump is threatening US ally Oman over its Iran talks
Trump has threatened to bomb Oman if it “gets in the way” of US efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, as a 60-day US-Iran memorandum expired on August 17 without a wider deal. The threat came as Oman and Iran were separately working on a mechanism for commercial shipping through the Strait, putting Washington at odds with an ally it has long relied on to communicate with Tehran.
In a Nutshell:
- The US and Iran signed a 60-day memorandum on June 18 to halt fighting, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and negotiate a wider settlement, but the ceasefire broke down within weeks, and the negotiating period ended on August 17 without an agreement.
- While US-Iran talks were paused, Oman continued its own discussions with Iran on reopening the Strait of Hormuz, building on its longstanding role as a channel between Washington and Tehran.
- By early August, the proposed Oman-Iran arrangement could have given Iran a role in managing inbound commercial ships, with Tehran seeking transit fees of 5% to 7% of cargo value, Oman proposing about 3%, and Washington opposing charges altogether.
- On August 17, Iran said it had reached an understanding with Oman on the coordinates of a transit route through the Strait of Hormuz, although details are still being finalised.
- Trump then threatened to bomb Oman if it “gets in the way” of US efforts, without explaining what action by Muscat would constitute interference.
Context
Oman's role has become more complicated as the US-Iran negotiations have deteriorated. Muscat has long maintained relations with both countries and has served as a channel between Washington and Tehran, making it useful to the US even as Iran was prepared to negotiate through it. The June memorandum reflected that role by requiring Iran to arrange safe commercial passage through Hormuz for 60 days and then to discuss the Strait's future administration and maritime services with Oman and other Gulf states. While the memorandum offered a pathway to a broader settlement, the ceasefire collapsed in July, and the 60-day window expired on August 17, with Trump rejecting an extension of the arrangement. Iran, meanwhile, says the US violated the memorandum soon after it was signed.
Why it matters
The US wants Hormuz reopened without giving Iran control over commercial traffic or allowing Tehran to collect fees, while Iran has used the Strait as one of its strongest remaining sources of leverage after months of war. Oman's negotiations could produce a partial reopening even though the US-Iran talks have failed, but that would leave the central dispute over who sets the rules for the waterway unresolved. The shipping situation shows why neither side can easily walk away. Before the war, about one-fifth of global oil and LNG shipments passed through Hormuz, but traffic has fallen to a tiny fraction of normal levels. The likely near-term outcome is therefore not necessarily a clean reopening or a comprehensive peace deal. Eurasia Group expects a limited agreement that could allow Hormuz traffic to recover only partially, while the US and Iran remain at odds over the terms for ending the war.
What we think
Washington's position presents a contradiction as the US both needs Oman due to its access to Tehran but, at the same time, is threatening it for pursuing a shipping arrangement with Iran. Former US ambassador to Oman Marc Sievers said the threat appeared aimed at getting Oman's “attention” and reflected frustration that Muscat was working closely with Tehran. He also said Washington appeared to want Oman to step aside and let the US lead the reopening. Oman is, therefore, navigating a tricky situation where it has to consider how to not get on Washington’s bad side. It is being asked to leverage its relationship with Iran to help resolve the ongoing dispute over the Strait of Hormuz, while being warned not to negotiate an outcome that Washington considers unacceptable. If the US insists that Hormuz can reopen only on American terms, it risks weakening the mediator it needs and prolonging disruption to a waterway that neither side has managed to restore through its own talks.