Trump's push for a Hormuz deal alarms experts over terms ceding oversight to Iran

Experts are raising alarm over reports that a potential agreement between Iran and Oman to reopen the Strait of Hormuz could grant Tehran unprecedented control over the international shipping route, a level of authority it did not hold before the conflict. The deal emerged as President Donald Trump stated on Tuesday that significant progress had been made in negotiations, suggesting an announcement could come within the week. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei confirmed Wednesday that arrangements with Oman had reached their final stage. Iran's deputy foreign minister has denied direct U.S. Negotiations and cautioned that an agreement would not necessarily reopen the waterway. Iranian state media reported that a draft bill under parliamentary review could bar U.S. And Israeli ships from crossing the strait.

The expected accord would likely last 60 days and require the U.S. To lift its naval blockade on Iranian ports. The arrangement could lead to mine clearing, broader ceasefire restoration, and resumed nuclear discussions. Under proposed terms, inbound vessels would use a northern route through Iranian waters, while outbound ships would traverse a southern route in Omani waters, coordinated with Iran. A U.S. Official told the Associated Press the deal would prevent Iran from formally approving transits or collecting tolls, yet regional analysts contend that formalizing Iranian oversight represents a significant strategic concession.

Matthew Levitt, senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told Jewish Insider that "President Trump is very eager for a deal that reopens the strait, and seems inclined to accept a deal under which Iran has greater oversight of ships entering and exiting the strait." He emphasized "The key is denying Iran any way of monetizing the flow of traffic through this international waterway."

Daniel Shapiro, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Biden's Iran liaison to Israel, stated that "if the deal that is being described comes into effect, it is a strategic win for Iran," Adding that "The United States will be strategically worse off with this outcome than we were before the war, but it is almost certainly the only way to prevent an escalation that would produce even greater global economic disruption than we have already seen." He warned Iran would likely receive early sanctions relief and only be expected to start nuclear negotiations that "could turn out to be fruitless and endless."

Jonathan Ruhe, director of foreign policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, highlighted differing interpretations of the agreement between Washington and Tehran. He noted Iran expects "at least de facto ability to toll and veto passage through Hormuz" And that "Tehrans redline for a deal is recognition of its right to determine and deter shipping in Hormuz, as the spoils of its victory and a key counterweight to further U.S. pressure." Such discrepancies, combined with approval hurdles from Iran's Supreme Leader, explain why no deal has materialized despite U.S. Expectations.

Richard Goldberg, senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and former Trump administration official, said "I find it difficult to believe we would ever cede formal control over a critical international waterway to a terrorist group, or otherwise tolerate that group collecting tolls or fees for what is already an international right to freedom of navigation." He suggested Iran's rhetoric may be exaggerated, stating that "in practice it could mean ships are just moving through the strait as they always used to without taking drone or missile fire," And that the outcome depends on whether formal control mechanisms exist.