The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations reported that a tanker transiting the Strait of Hormuz heard two explosions approximately nine nautical miles southeast of Kumzar off the Omani coast, with no damage or injuries reported [22]. The incident came as eight global shipping associations jointly appealed to the United Nations to oppose any toll regime in the strait, warning that fees would harm livelihoods worldwide and set a precedent for other maritime chokepoints [36]. The appeals and explosions unfolded as Iran and Oman reported that a shipping-route agreement was in its final stages [4][23].
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei stated that geographic coordinates for the proposed route had been agreed upon by both sides and that a joint statement was in its final review and drafting stage [27][31]. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi described the arrangement as a new model for regulating navigation rather than a full reopening, with commercial ships passing through Iranian territorial waters on both inbound and outbound legs [3][12]. The proposed two-route system would give Iran control over ships entering the Gulf while Oman oversees outbound shipping, according to regional officials [10][33]. Gharibabadi, however, stated that Tehran would control both entry and exit routes [34]. Iran International reported that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei had approved a 60-day temporary agreement [38].
Iranian officials have repeatedly framed the talks as strictly bilateral with Oman and denied any direct negotiation with Washington [1][24]. President Donald Trump, by contrast, has spoken of "excellent talks" and said a deal could be announced within days [1][26][27]. Trump has also stated that he believes the war with Iran will end "pretty soon" and that Iran cannot continue much longer [2][13]. Iran's parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf dismissed the US approach as "theatre diplomacy," accusing Washington of alternating between threats and outreach as a manipulative tactic [7].
The toll dispute remains unresolved. Iran has sought fees of 5 to 7 percent of cargo value, while Oman proposed 3 percent, and the US has opposed any fees [12][44]. Some reports, however, indicated the draft agreement would impose no transit fees or service charges [5][48]. Trump stated he would not allow Iran to charge fees, saying "if anybody's going to charge, we'll charge" [31]. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Hormuz is an international waterway and no country has the right to charge fees or control transit, warning of a dangerous precedent for other chokepoints [19][29]. International Maritime Organization Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez said countries do not have the right to introduce tolls on straits used for international navigation [36]. Legal scholars have argued that the right of transit passage has crystallized into customary international law under UNCLOS [37][40].
Trade-policy analysts warned that fee-based passage or continued closure would raise costs for fuel, fertilizer, and freight, with effects felt acutely by import-dependent economies in Asia and Africa [36][46]. Drew Thompson of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies said the IMO and other international agencies have limited ability to influence any deal involving Iran, Oman, and the US [36].
Iranian officials conditioned any real reopening on the cessation of the US naval blockade. Baqaei warned that "the factors making the Strait of Hormuz insecure still exist on the part of the United States, particularly the naval blockade and other aggressive and threatening actions against Iran" [4]. Gharibabadi stated that the agreement with Oman concerns establishing joint control mechanisms and coordination of ship traffic, and that the reopening of the strait has its own preconditions not addressed by the Oman deal [18]. US Central Command stated it was continuing to enforce the blockade, redirecting 49 commercial vessels, disabling two, and boarding two others [10].
Multiple analysts described the arrangement as a concession that would let Tehran convert wartime pressure into an institutionalized management role. Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute said Tehran ultimately wants to convert wartime influence into a sustainable political and institutional role in managing the waterway [29][31]. George Washington University professor Sina Azodi said Iranians have learned that by blockading the strait they can make the global economy scream and will not let go of this strategic asset easily [31]. Supreme Leader's adviser and former IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaee called Hormuz "more important than dozens of nuclear bombs" [19]. International Crisis Group analyst Ali Vaez stated that the deal does not mean the strait will be reopened and that Iran's ability to take the world economy hostage remains a powerful deterrent [18].
Parsi also argued that Washington should not reject an agreement merely because it fails to preserve the appearance of unqualified American dominance, drawing parallels to the Suez Crisis and the Montreux Convention [17][31]. Former Pentagon official David Des Roches said the rough outlines of a deal are that Iran would deny free international passage in areas of its territorial waters, which is probably about the best that can be reached at this point [31].
Analysts identified competing camps within Iran's establishment — economic pragmatists favoring agreement, military figures wanting to improve their position first, and ideological hardliners who see any deal as the end of the Islamic Republic's identity [24]. Vice President JD Vance described Iran's leadership as "fractured and difficult to navigate" and said negotiations would be a complex process [7][48]. The absence of the IRGC from the Iranian delegation was cited as an obstacle [29].
Maritime insurance markets responded to the continued incidents. War-risk premiums for Hormuz transit climbed to 7.5 to 10 percent of hull value, according to industry reports [50]. Intertanko managing director Tim Wilkins said the industry faces "a broadening, deteriorating, and increasingly complex security situation" [50]. Kpler analyst Matthew Wright said the current threat to crude flows is the worst point of the entire crisis so far [50].
Greenpeace Germany warned that an expanding oil spill from a stranded suspected Russian shadow-fleet tanker off Oman's coast exemplified the dangers of Russia's shadow fleet practices [6][7]. Spokesperson Nina Noelle said the risk of an even larger environmental disaster remains serious [7].
Regional states continued diplomatic engagement. Pakistan's Foreign Office said it remained engaged alongside other states in efforts to resolve the crisis, with Oman leading different aspects of the process [25]. Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman spoke with Trump urging him to delay military action and return to negotiations [10]. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Gulf counterparts that Iran is ready to retaliate but that finding a diplomatic solution is the best way to avoid wider escalation [6][10]. Pakistan also opened six trade corridors for Iran to use its ports, providing a partial alternative to the blocked strait, reportedly with US awareness [49].
The draft agreement requires approval by Iran's Supreme National Security Council before taking effect [5]. A senior Gulf official put the chance of a deal by the end of the week at 50-50 [29]. Lancaster University professor Simon Mabon said Iran has the upper hand if it can get the blockade of its ports lifted [31].