Iran, Oman agree on temporary Hormuz route: What we know

The US-Israel war on Iran, which began with strikes on Tehran on February 28, has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz to shipping, sending global energy markets into crisis. The narrow waterway through which one-fifth of global oil and natural gas supplies from Gulf producers are shipped in peacetime has become a major bone of contention between Washington and Tehran, and disagreements over the critical channel continue to hinder any hopes of a lasting peace plan.

Since the US bombing of parts of Iran in July following more disputes over the strait, Iran has refused to hold direct talks with it. Even though active warfare has since paused again – replaced by a strategy of piling economic pressure on Iran – it has maintained that it will speak directly to only Oman about the future of the waterway, which passes through the territorial waters of the two countries.

Here is what we know about the new route they have agreed on.

What is the crisis in Hormuz about?

Before the war on Iran began, more than 20 percent of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments from the regional producers passed through the strait, which is the only sea route connecting the Gulf to the open ocean. About 130 ships crossed the strait every day. Just before the war began, the price of Brent crude – the global benchmark for oil – was about $66 a barrel.

Following the attacks on Tehran, which were carried out as talks between Iran and the US were underway in Oman, Iran closed the strait in early March, allowing only a few ships it deemed “friendly” to pass through. In April, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) issued a route map to those ships allowed to pass. This routed traffic much closer to the Iranian coast than they had previously sailed and designated a large section of Omani territorial waters as “restricted”.

The US has previously accused Iran of placing mines in the strait. While Iran has not confirmed this, it stated at the time that following its designated route would minimise the risk of encountering them.

Below is a map of the route approved by Iran in April:

The US later enforced a naval blockade of Iranian ports in and around the strait in a bid to cripple the country by restricting its fuel exports.

The war and ensuing regional tensions resulted in global energy shortages, especially in Asia where countries are particularly dependent on shipments from the Gulf, and crude prices soared. Over the course of the war, the price surged past $100 on several occasions, most recently on July 23. In March, the highest Brent crude oil price reached almost $120 a barrel.

On June 17, a memorandum of understanding (MoU) was signed between the US and Iran as they agreed to a ceasefire to facilitate peace negotiations, lasting up to 60 days. Among other measures, Iran agreed to keep the strait open for all traffic, free of charge, for 60 days. However, the vague wording of the MoU led to disagreements over which routes ships should take and the waterway fractured into two disputed routes – a southern course approved by Oman and backed by the US, and a northern one approved by Iran. The southern route is the one used by commercial carriers under US naval protection so far.

Diplomatic efforts towards a broader peace deal have since stalled and passage through the strait remains high risk.

What do we know about the new route?

On Tuesday, Gharibabadi announced on state television that Iran and Oman have agreed that the entry to the new approved route will begin in Iranian territorial waters “and part of the exit route would also be through our territorial waters”.

The transit corridor will be 7 miles (11.3km) wide, he said.

Tuesday, an oil tanker was disabled by an unidentified projectile close to Oman’s Ash Shishah, near the strait’s entrance, the United Kingdom’s Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said.

Separately, an IRGC spokesperson said: “We entered into negotiations with Oman about a month ago and have reached results that have been accepted by both sides. Agreements have been reached on the share of each country in the waters of the strait and the share of Iran and Oman in its revenues.”

However, key details remain unclear, including the precise coordinates of the route, when ships can start traversing the strait safely and how revenues would be generated.

Specific operational protocols are also not known yet, such as whether any vessels or flags will be barred from using the route.

Does this mean the Strait of Hormuz will reopen?

No. Gharibabadi emphasised that Iran has only agreed on a route for shipping with Oman, and does not consider the strait open despite the agreement on the location of a shipping route with Oman.

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

Iranian army spokesperson Mohammad Akraminia said vessels will be subject to Iranian surveillance before they enter the strait and will only be allowed to pass if Iran grants them permission.

Gharibabadi insisted the US must fulfil its commitments under the June MoU, including granting sanctions relief and the release of frozen Iranian assets, if it wants to resume peace talks.

He urged countries to resist US pressure to place economic pressure on Iran.

US President Donald Trump announced last week the “most crushing economic operation ever” against Iran, and threatened sanctions against any country doing business with it. On Monday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent laid out a wave of new sanctions against 60 entities around the world it accuses of facilitating Iranian oil sales.

“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”.

What has Oman said about Hormuz?

Gharibabadi’s remarks followed talks with Omani negotiators in Tehran to finalise the details of a phased framework for the future management of the strait. Iran and Oman have been in talks for several weeks about controlling traffic through the strategic waterway.

Oman, which is known for its neutrality and position as a mediator between Iran and the US, which it considers an ally, has not publicly stated that it intends to join Iran in controlling the Strait of Hormuz.

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

How has the US responded?

While the US has not formally responded to the news of an agreement between Iran and Oman for a shipping passage through the strait, last week Trump threatened to bomb Oman if it “gets in the way” of a peace deal between the US and Iran.

“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the s*** out of them,” he told US broadcaster Fox News on August 17. Back in May, he made a similar threat, saying, “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.”

Trump also told Fox that Iran should surrender, and claimed that his administration had opened a direct backchannel for talks with the IRGC, something Iranian officials immediately denied.

On Wednesday, an IRGC spokesman told Iranian media that the US has been obstructing negotiations between Oman and Iran, leading to them being delayed.

The US and Oman are close partners with a relationship stretching back nearly 200 years.

However, an exclusive understanding between Iran and Oman over the waterway runs contrary to one of Washington’s core demands: that Iran should 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, analysts say.

But experts say Trump is also likely angry that the US has seemingly been cut out of a 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 in the UK, told Al Jazeera last week.

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 the temporary agreement announced on Tuesday.

What about the mines in Hormuz?

The US has long accused Iran of planting sea mines – explosives planted underwater to threaten commercial and military ships – in the Strait of Hormuz. Sea mines can include moored contact mines that detonate when a vessel strikes them, while more sophisticated “bottom mines” sit on the seabed and use sensors to trigger an explosion when they detect a ship’s magnetic or acoustic signature above.

There is no clear answer as to how many mines there are or where exactly the sea mines are in Hormuz, as Iran has not officially disclosed this. Trump has asserted that US forces have destroyed “all” 28 Iranian mine-laying boats in the strait’s international waters.

On Tuesday, Gharibabadi dismissed Trump’s claim, 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.