Iran Keeps Pouring Cold Water On A Deal – But Does It Matter? – Iran has once again thrown efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz into disarray, publicly disputing Washington’s description of how negotiations are progressing only hours after the U.S. suggested that an agreement could be announced as soon as Wednesday, August 5.
The most recent confusion arose when Axios reported early today, citing two regional sources and a U.S. official, that Iran, Oman, and the United States were close to finalizing a new 60-day interim arrangement governing the passage of commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iranian state-linked media, however, subsequently reported that the Iran-Oman agreement had been postponed, blaming American interference and President Donald Trump’s military threats.
The Islamic regime also reportedly took umbrage with Washington’s attempts to characterize itself as a party to the negotiations.
Iran F-14 Tomcat Fighter. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
The competing accounts of the ongoing negotiations are a familiar story by now: American officials declare that progress has been made and the markets respond, but Tehran denies it.
Where We Were On Monday
Over the weekend, U.S. President Donald Trump postponed a planned attack on Iran after indicating that Tehran and several Middle Eastern governments had requested additional time to negotiate with the regime in Tehran.
In a Saturday post on Truth Social, the president said that the United States would hold off on the strikes as long as an agreement could be reached quickly to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and end Iran’s nuclear program.
Speaking aboard Air Force One on Saturday, Trump said negotiations would begin on Monday and described a deal as imminent, warning that he would push ahead with the biggest attack “since World War II” if a deal wasn’t made. And by Monday afternoon, Trump was telling reporters in the Oval Office that Hormuz could be opened the following day, with nuclear negotiations following as a second phase. The comments were reminiscent of promises made during the announcement of the ill-fated “memorandum of understanding” ceasefire.
Iran Army Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also raised expectations even further during an appearance on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Tuesday morning, insisting that there was a chance a deal could arrive that day or Wednesday. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also told reporters that he believed progress had been made.
A deal did not materialize on Tuesday, and as of Wednesday morning, the expected announcement remains uncertain.
Iran Wants A Deal On Its Terms
Iran has spent weeks insisting that it was not negotiating with Washington, and that disagreement came to a head on Wednesday when Iranian state-linked media reported that a planned Iran-Oman announcement had been postponed, blaming U.S. interference and President Trump’s military threats.
The reports said that Iran would not conclude any agreement with Oman on the management of the Strait of Hormuz “under the shadow of threats.”
Just hours later, however, Iran appeared to strike a more optimistic tone. According to a statement from Iran’s Foreign Ministry cited by The Kobeissi Letter, Tehran said a joint announcement with Oman regarding the Strait of Hormuz had entered its “final stage,” provided that “certain parties do not interfere.” The ministry also reportedly said that Iran and Oman had already agreed on a new shipping management structure for the Strait.
The report suggests that the negotiations themselves may not have broken down after all, with the dispute centering on Washington’s public characterization of the talks and the conditions under which Tehran is prepared to formally announce any new agreement.
This Isn’t A Peace Deal
Even if negotiations do conclude today, or perhaps later in the week, it still doesn’t amount to a peace deal that would end the five-month conflict between the United States and Iran.
The Iran-Oman deal concerns how commercial traffic is managed through the Strait of Hormuz, and it appears that Tehran is not taking Washington’s demands into account.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio appeared to make that distinction himself on Tuesday when he said the Hormuz arrangement would be an “immediate” agreement and that the broader objective is still to negotiate the end of Iran’s nuclear program.
The proposed 60-day arrangement that appears to be emerging now would focus on restoring commercial shipping and stabilizing global oil markets, paving the way for a deal between the U.S. and Iran.
In June, an agreement just like this was made. Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding that similarly sought to restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz while halting hostilities and military strikes.
The agreement quickly unraveled as Iranian forces launched strikes against commercial vessels passing through the Strait on the Omani side, prompting the United States to respond militarily. Fighting resumed, the deal fell apart, and the United States eventually launched an almost two-week-long strike campaign that ultimately failed to bring Iran meaningfully back to the negotiating table.
Whatever deal may arrive today, it won’t mean peace.
About the Author: Jack Buckby
Jack Buckby is a British researcher and analyst specializing in defense and national security, based in New York. His work focuses on military capability, procurement, and strategic competition, producing and editing analysis for policy and defense audiences. He brings extensive editorial experience, with a career output spanning over 1,000 articles at 19FortyFive and National Security Journal, and has previously authored books and papers on extremism and deradicalization.
