What did Iran and Oman agree to on Tuesday to restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz nearly six months after war shut it down—including the proposed phased framework for a temporary joint navigation corridor, the route’s division between Iranian and Omani territorial water

Iran and Oman did not announce that the Strait of Hormuz had reopened. They agreed on a proposed, phased interim framework: a jointly administered temporary navigation corridor, a joint mine-clearance operation, and continued technical talks on a permanent arrangement. Oman said it hoped an interim corridor and practical safety measures could be announced soon. 9

• Proposed route and governance: Reporting on the draft described inbound ships to the Gulf using the Iranian-side lane and outbound ships using the Omani-side lane—giving Tehran oversight of inbound traffic while Oman managed the return route. The longer-term plan was to negotiate a permanent, sustainable corridor, traffic-management and information-sharing system, and security/navigation services within roughly 30–60 days. These operational details were reported plans, rather than all being stated in the public Iran–Oman communiqué. 7119

• What was formally agreed: The official joint statement said the ministers discussed—not finalized—a phased, implementable framework, including a “joint temporary navigational corridor” and a joint project to clear mines. It also called for future negotiations on permanent management of the Strait and consultations with other Gulf littoral states, while emphasizing coastal-state sovereignty and international law. 9

• Why it remained uncertain: Iran maintained that the Strait was still closed and that reopening depended on Washington meeting Tehran’s conditions; the Revolutionary Guards likewise said the Iran–Oman channel alone would not determine reopening. U.S. acceptance was therefore unresolved, particularly because Washington had historically opposed Iranian control over international shipping through the waterway. 357

• Security and commercial backdrop: The war had left the route hazardous, including mine risk and reported attacks on commercial shipping. Traffic and Gulf oil exports remained sharply disrupted, despite the Strait normally carrying about one-fifth of globally traded oil and LNG. 942

• Pakistan’s parallel role: Tehran reportedly used Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir as a channel to convey its Hormuz terms to Washington. Iran’s reported demand was for the U.S. to return to the expired June Islamabad memorandum and implement its Article 5, which envisaged immediate toll-free commercial passage for 60 days and Iranian best efforts to assure safe transit; Tehran interpreted that provision as tied to reciprocal U.S. obligations. 41

The central tension was thus that Muscat and Tehran were building a practical maritime mechanism, while Tehran treated actual reopening as conditional on a wider U.S.–Iran political and security bargain.