President Donald Trump threatened to bomb Oman, a US ally mediating the Iran conflict, if it "gets in the way" of US negotiations with Tehran, as the 60-day memorandum of understanding between Washington and Iran expired without extension [3][9][24]. The threat, relayed by Fox News correspondent Trey Yingst, came hours after Iran announced it had reached an understanding with Oman on a transit route through the Strait of Hormuz [13][24]. Brent crude settled at $90.87 per barrel [27][34], with shipping through the strait slowing to five vessels on Saturday and none on Sunday, compared to 31 the prior weekend [27]; CNBC separately reported three vessels on Sunday against a pre-war baseline of 130 [31]. German weekly Die Zeit noted that Fox News did not provide audio of the interview, making the quote unverifiable [36].
Trump stated: "If Oman gets in the way, we'll bomb the shit out of them" [3][24]. He had previously threatened Oman in May [37]. Der Spiegel described Oman as the "Switzerland of the Middle East" for its mediator role [37]. In Oval Office remarks, Trump said Oman "is not behaving well" but "can be handled easily" [10][12]. The threat followed an announcement by Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei that Iran and Oman had reached "an understanding regarding the map of the transit route" through the strait, with a mechanism designed to "safeguard the sovereign rights of the two littoral states and ensure the safe passage of commercial vessels" [3][18][24]. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the Oman talks on maritime transit are separate from ceasefire negotiations with the US [29]. Oman hosts three US military bases, according to BBC Persian [39].
A contradiction exists over whether a backchannel operates between Washington and the IRGC. Trump stated that communications with the IRGC were ongoing, describing Iranian officials as "good poker players, but they're dying" [5][31]. US envoy Jared Kushner stated that communications between the US and various Iranian government bodies were "more intensive than ever" and "very productive," though he acknowledged no bilateral understanding had been reached [19]. The IRGC spokesman denied any talks: "There are no talks taking place between IRGC officials and the Americans, and this lie by Trump is merely fantasies caused by the delusions and nightmares he has suffered as a result of defeat and desperation in the war" [3][30]. Baghaei dismissed reports of secret contacts through Iraqi Kurdistan or a meeting in Erbil as "media techniques and psychological operations" [4].
Trump demanded Iran "put up the white flag of surrender," asserting that Iran's military had been completely defeated and that he was "in no hurry" to reach a deal [18][22][27]. He stated the US was not seeking to extend the expired MoU and that Iran would not accept the agreement Washington considers necessary, reiterating that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon [4][12][23]. A senior Iranian official stated that Iran had shifted from a defensive to a "fully offensive" posture and would conduct a "timely and precise" military attack to break the US naval blockade if diplomacy failed, setting a deadline of weeks for US implementation of the agreement's provisions as a precondition for further negotiations [20][27]. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi stated that the strait "cannot be seized by tweet, aircraft carrier, decree, or campaign speech" and belongs to Iran [25][31]. Major General Amir Hatami warned that Iranian warriors would "break your legs" [25]. Iran's Foreign Ministry announced it had suspended all commitments under the Islamabad MoU, citing US violations, and demanded 5-7% cargo fees from vessels transiting the strait [38].
Trump also stated that "after we finish defeating Iran... pretty soon I'll be declaring the Hormuz Strait a territory of the United States" [20][25]. Constitutional expert Bruce Fein stated that unilateral annexation would require a Senate-approved treaty or law and would constitute aggression under international law [25]. International law expert Natalie Klein stated that effective military control similar to US post-war control of Japan would be needed for such a claim [25]. Georgetown University professor Paul Musgrave assessed that Trump's statements are aimed at his domestic voter base and should not be taken literally [25]. Raed Jarrar, advocacy director at DAWN, called the bombing threat a violation of the UN Charter, stating that the prohibition on the threat of force "binds the United States exactly as it binds everyone else" [32]. Hudson Institute senior fellow Bryan Clark argued that both governments are "simply making assertions and hoping the other side backs down," predicting the strait will functionally remain under Iranian and Yemeni control via a fee arrangement [18].
Oil prices reflected the standoff. SEB Research analyst Bjarne Schieldrop stated that prices were unlikely to move substantially higher unless there was a halt in crude flow or a closure of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait [27]. Price Futures Group analyst Phil Flynn said "as the rhetoric heats up, so do the prices" [27]. Naga.com analyst Frank Walbaum noted that restricted shipping and a negotiation stalemate limit the potential for further price decline [27]. Rapidan Energy president Bob McNally predicted Brent prices would rise toward $100 per barrel as China increases its oil imports [34]. US Energy Secretary Chris Wright stated that "the world does not need Iranian oil" and that the president is "playing the long game" in pursuing economic strangulation of Iran's oil exports [27]. Obsidian Risk Advisors director Brett Erickson argued that targeting individual sanctions-evasion entities is like "whack-a-mole" and does not change Iran's behavior [17].
Gulf allies expressed frustration with Trump's handling of the conflict, according to anonymous Gulf and European officials. One Gulf official stated that "Trump started the war and we are paying the price" [26]. A senior European official described the August 7 joint defense agreement signed by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan as a signal that "the US alone is not enough" [26]. Eurasia Group's Firas Maksad described Trump's Iran policy as "unpredictable and erratic," and Arab Gulf States Institute expert Anna Jacobs noted a decline in trust toward the US [26]. A White House official rejected these accounts, stating that Trump "has a special relationship with all Gulf partners" and that the US is in "regular contact with all regional allies" [26].
In Washington, Democratic lawmakers announced plans to introduce war powers resolutions. Representative Ro Khanna stated that "at this point we may just need to file war powers resolutions for the 192 other countries" [33]. Senator Tim Kaine announced he would introduce an Oman war powers resolution, arguing Trump's threats benefit adversaries like Russia and China [33]. UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for renewed negotiations and urged both sides to moderate their rhetoric [36].
The crisis's economic fallout was not limited to the belligerents. BBC Urdu reported that the Hormuz closure threatens price increases for food, medicine, helium for microchips, and batteries in Pakistan and other import-dependent nations, with a think tank warning of an 11% food price increase in Pakistan [41]. South Korea, a major importer of Middle Eastern oil, for the first time mentioned "military contributions" to the Hormuz crisis, including potential deployment of patrol aircraft and warships, in response to Trump's criticism of Seoul's lack of support [43]. International relations expert Hamidreza Azizi stated that Trump's threats show Iran-Oman cooperation on Hormuz has reached a level concerning to the US [40]. Stimson Institute researcher Kaveh Hassan argued the threats are unlikely to push Oman closer to Iran and instead serve Iran's interest by straining US-Gulf relations [40].