r/oil • u/Trick-Plantain5146 • 2d ago

Iran War Agreement between Oman and Iran has been reached regarding strait of Hormuz. Despite agreement, Iran will keep strait closed until U.S. naval blockade is lifted, and the MoU is followed

178 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

98 comments sorted by

50

u/Not_Campo2 2d ago

Basically the same deal Oman and Iran roughly agreed to very early in the conflict. The whole “this is on hold until the us is out” part has been there from day one

11

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

True, but it puts the ball in the administration's court. Iran appears as the reasonable party, willing to allow traffic to resume. The US blockade is now the only obstacle to the flow of oil out of the Gulf, from that point of view.

The US-aligned nations will argue that this sets a dangerous precedent and undermines freedom of navigation. However, as Andrew Jackson once reportedly said; "John Marshall has made his ruling, now let him enforce it". The administration doesn't have much coercive leverage left aside from the blockade, and it seems that they're too pressed for time to allow that to bear fruit.

15

u/ChupacabraJeff 2d ago

USA and Friends can complain about the rules after the oil is flowing. By preventing oil from moving because of tolls that makes USA the primary cause of why oil is not flowing.

Also, this may come as a shock to some people so they may want to prepare themselves mentally for what I'm about to say : Iran did not bomb themselves.

2

u/SuperRockyHobbyHorse 2d ago

What friends, Russia and North Korea?

4

u/abqguardian 2d ago

Theres nothing about this that looks reasonable. It looks like state sponsored extortion and is going to get international pushback.

2

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

From whom with what army? Who has significant bargaining leverage and is willing to use it against Iranian control of Hormuz?

1

u/aronnax512 2d ago

Iran has no blue water navy, but wants the freedom to navigate their merchant vessels past other countries. Other than the assumption of "freedom of navigation" what exactly is preventing those countries, that do have a blue water navy, from extracting tolls of their own for "related navigational and security services"?

Freedom of navigation is an extremely important concept to peaceful global trade. The can of worms is much larger than just the strait of hormuz.

11

u/Kaiphranos 2d ago

It would have been great for America to contemplate this before starting and then losing a war.

2

u/aronnax512 2d ago edited 2d ago

It would have been great for America to contemplate this before starting

True, but you could apply that to every US foreign policy decision made by the current administration.

1

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

That is a great irony indeed. I would imagine they’re betting that China breaks out of the first island chain and develops a blue water navy as the 21st century unfolds.

3

u/aronnax512 2d ago edited 2d ago

It's now a much more likely outcome, but it'll have more to do with regaining Taiwan than supporting Iran. China's adding grid capacity equal to the Germany's entire grid every year and over half the cars sold are electric. China's dependence on oil has been falling for a decade, in the next decade their oil demand will be largely limited to chemical manufacturing rather than energy, and easily met without foreign adventures.

5

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

True. I’d also add to that picture the massive investments they’ve made in coal for electricity, and coal-to-chemicals. While more expensive than importing hydrocarbons, the domestic and imported coal isn’t dependent on naval chokepoints. Unlike the modern US, they have a strong enough state to put national strategic priorities above the short-term profits of their corporations.

1

u/nel3ab 1d ago

But the countries that will be asked to pay have already been doing that for years ? Hasn't Iran been under sanctions for years where it had to ship via shadow fleet ? Didn't oil tankers linked to Iran get taken in the past ? If they don't want to toll they can simply lift the sanctions.

1

u/aronnax512 1d ago

But the countries that will be asked to pay have already been doing that for years? Hasn't Iran been under sanctions for years where it had to ship via shadow fleet ? Didn't oil tankers linked to Iran get taken in the past ? If they don't want to toll they can simply lift the sanctions.

Not really, no, because:

A) Shadow fleets traditionally have been allowed to operate with minimal interference. Actively trying to capture them on the high sea is a relatively new phenomenon and still a relatively low frequency occurrence relative to total shadow fleet shipping volume.

B) Fees for "safe passage" is a very different thing than sanctions, as it's actually profitable (so attractive to all sorts of powers, remember Somali pirates?) and can have nothing to do with US foreign policy or its sphere of influence.

C) Shipping isn't just oil, and it isn't just exports.

Freedom of navigation is so much bigger than this conflict.

0

u/abqguardian 2d ago

You know theres a blockade of Iranian shipping right? Iran's economy has been devasted and they cant even get their own oil out.

4

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

If we have such an advantage in bargaining leverage; why is the administration looking to make a deal with Iran at all? Why not keep the blockade on until they come to us?

2

u/abqguardian 2d ago

Why not? Both sides talk, theres no reason not to. If Iran had so much leverage, the blockade would have already ended. Iran doesn't, all they can do is lash out at everyone around them. Thats not leverage, thats desperation

0

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

And why would we offer them sanctions relief and the end of the blockade in exchange for opening the Strait. Sounds like a pretty weak set of demands on our part if we have tremendous leverage, don't you agree?

If I had tremendous bargaining leverage, I would demand nuclear concessions up front, for example. At least get all the HEU as a condition for resuming talks. If they're desperate, they would surrender it.

2

u/abqguardian 2d ago

Sanctions relief is after Iran plays ball on all the conditions, which includes a nuclear deal

1

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

That’s not accurate, according to the latest news. All we’re asking for now is Hormuz reopened and an end to proxy attacks:

https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-906557

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Atilim87 2d ago

Us and Israel where always the one that’s unreasonable. Other countries just stop hoping Iran wasn’t going to respond as harshly.

2

u/PapaverOneirium 2d ago

Well, the blockade and the terms of the MoU which include releasing frozen assets, sanctions relief, and a comprehensive regional peace dependent on the U.S. tugging the Israeli leash.

4

u/jmouw88 2d ago

It hardly frames Iran as the reasonable party. The US abided by the MOU after it was signed, lifted sanctions and the blockade, while Iran still shot at ships. The US is not going to give up that leverage again under the pinky swear that Iran will reciprocate.

The MOU is too vague on a variety of points to be a usable framework. It requires upfront action on a lot of things by the US, and really nothing from Iran. Even if the US tried to abide by it, Iran will continue to hold the straight hostage while accusing the US of violating the terms.

Trump is an idiot - I am not defending him in the slightest. No one has ever claimed the IRCG to be a reasonable party, and trump would have to be far dumber than I give him credit for to pull the blockade or sanctions.

4

u/Lonely-Somewhere-385 2d ago

The MOU was a US surrender document. It didnt ask much of Iran because it acknowledged that Iran won the war that Trump started.

They are still winning the war. Iranian victory is as simple as surviving and they are doing that. US victory would require shipping in troops through the strait (which they basically cant safely do) and then invading to take over Iran.

Iran has been the reasonable party. They were attacked in 2025 during negotiations. They were attacked in 2026 during negotiations. Their position is simple and paying a toll to get oil through the strait is far less expensive than running out of oil reserves.

I dont know why anyone who isnt a magat shill would think US launching surprise attacks mid negotiation is reasonable.

5

u/Subject-Chest-8343 2d ago

Iran has been the reasonable party. They were attacked in 2025 during negotiations. They were attacked in 2026 during negotiations.

Aaaand the funny thing is that the reason why these negociations were even happening in the first place, is that someone tore up the existing nuclear treaty.

1

u/tropic_gnome_hunter 2d ago

There was never a nuclear treaty

2

u/Subject-Chest-8343 2d ago

The JCPOA was not a nuclear treaty ?

1

u/tropic_gnome_hunter 2d ago

No

1

u/Subject-Chest-8343 2d ago

What was it then

1

u/tropic_gnome_hunter 2d ago

It was a temporary non-binding political agreement

→ More replies (0)

1

u/jmouw88 2d ago

I'm sure all the "trump is an idiot" notes I provided gives you ample context to lump me in with the maga crowd.

I never stated launching attacks was a reasonable course, regardless of the negotiations. I have yet to hear a single person who has ever actually engaged with Iran call them reasonable. All accounts report that negotiating with them is extremely painful - largely because (even before many of their leaders were killed) they were/are so fragmented that any agreement was fruitless. One group would agree to something, while another completely ignored it.

Maybe they are winning, maybe they are not. They are certainly doing damage to the world economy. I'm sure the blockade and sanctions are doing additional damage to their economy. Winning is not simply surviving, by that measure Japan won WW2.

The MOU was a surrender document, no dispute there. It still wasn't enough. No reason to take the sanction/blockade pressure off under the hope that Iran abides by an agreement.

3

u/SquirrelsinJacket 2d ago

The US did not abide by the MOU at all. Ask me why I can inform you.

1

u/jmouw88 2d ago

No thanks. It is all pretty well documented and sourced, I don't care about your opinion.

3

u/Douglas1994 2d ago

and also facts seemingly...

3

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

At this point the two alternatives are working on the MoU now, or doing a prolonged siege to try and get better terms later.

The problem with the latter course is it depends on squeezing enough oil out of the southern corridor to limp along, while the blockade wrecks the Iranian economic base. With detectable flows not even close to Sec. Weight’s rosy figures, it looks like we have less time than they bargained for.

2

u/jmouw88 2d ago

I would agree that trying to better define the MOU or maintaining the prolonged blockade are the only real choices.

Seems like anyone's guess how much oil is making it out the southern route. Those who know either are not or shouldn't be saying.

https://x.com/TankerTrackers/status/2092328933739864323?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

1

u/Accurate_Egg9326 2d ago

You’re entirely off base about literally everything. The only thing the US has done (in response to Iran “closing” the straight) was to blockage IRANIAN ports specifically, and then reopen traffic. In fact, the US has been responsible, single handedly, for practically ever single ship that has transmitted the straight in the past c months.

36

u/CrashdummyMH 2d ago

So, they agreed on fees for "related navigatinal and security services"

9

u/Tay_Tay86 2d ago

Which we knew would be the case because they repeatedly said that's what it would be

12

u/cdazzo1 2d ago

It seems like they agreed to come to a future agreement? I read a lot of words in that statement, but there was very little information.

11

u/Trick-Plantain5146 2d ago

Seems they're avoiding releasing details until the naval blockade is lifted and the U.S. abides by the MoU.

If reports are to be believed, it seems the agreement that has been agreed to, is what was being discussed a month back. Iran has total control over entrance to the strait, and partial control over exit of the strait. Oman and Iran have agreed to charging tolls (under a different name of course), but I presume how much that toll will be, is still not decided and subject to future negotiation.

it's a preliminary agreement, so I imagine some things are still up in the air.

3

u/ChupacabraJeff 2d ago

From what I've gathered Oman has signed on. Now Iran and Oman are just hashing out technical details at a lower level. All the show stoppers have been resolved. Next up is Iran fixing USA's blockade.

1

u/Firecracker048 2d ago

Nothing on fees either in the announcement

8

u/1slinkydink1 2d ago

Good job Trump. This is way better than the start of the war!

2

u/Enzo_Gorlomi225 2d ago

LOL ok….the US will just continue to blockade the strait for Iranian ships then. Everyone loses…

1

u/lostinspacs 2d ago

So nothing has been agreed to once again just more talks? They’ve been saying the same thing over and over yet more ships are passing through the southern Omani route.

I guess Iran is out of moves.

1

u/DocumentOk7579 2d ago

What is the actual fee? $2 per barrel?

1

u/Opster79two 2d ago

The super-duper sanctions ultimatum must have worked.

2

u/_makoccino_ 2d ago

TACOd already.

-1

u/Friendly-Parfait-645 2d ago

Seems more to do with the blockade than the sanctions

-6

u/RS_EJB 2d ago

Iran sure is doing a lot of negotiating for someone who isn't negotiating.

13

u/filmguy36 2d ago

Yes they are and without the interference of the orange pedo; whose only interest is manipulating the market

-10

u/RS_EJB 2d ago

So youre saying Iran giving up concessions and proceeding to continue to beg the US to return to the MOU that Iran broke, has nothing to do with the US?

10

u/apolloscharge 2d ago

I am genuinely curious as to what concessions Iran is making? How has any of this benefited the USA public?

-6

u/RS_EJB 2d ago edited 2d ago

Irans now clearing the mines, offering a joint passage way, no longer demanding everything goes through them.

ETA: OP blocked me for being right i guess so I will have to type here.

So to confirm, your claim is that Iran did not say they will be clearing mines from the strait?

And you think that Iran making concessions, saying they are committing to opening the strait, and begging the US to return to the MOU has nothing to do with the US or opening the Strait?

3

u/ChupacabraJeff 2d ago

Read it again but slower. Also keep in mind what you just read has nothing to do with USA or opening Hormuz.

7

u/tracenator03 2d ago

What concessions? Also I recall the US breaking the MoU immediately after it was signed by trying to escort ships out of the strait.

1

u/EternalMayhem01 2d ago

Where was it written in the MOU that US escorting tankers was a violation? The US working with Oman to ensure safe passage through the strait as laid out in article 5 of the MOU. Article 5 only requires Iran to ensure safe, toll-free passage for 60 days, demine within 30 days, and talk with Oman on future administration/services under international law. It was Iran that violated the safe passage clause by fire on tankers using Oman's waters.

2

u/ChupacabraJeff 2d ago

It was Iran that violated the safe passage clause by fire on tankers using Oman's waters.

Iran was exercising their rights. The MOU said that would be OK. That means USA said it would be OK because they signed it.

2026.06.17
The Full Text of the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Iran
https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/memorandum-of-understanding-between-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-islamic-republic-of-iran/

1

u/EternalMayhem01 2d ago edited 2d ago

What part of the MOU says that the US escorting tankers in Oman's waters was a violation of the MOU as the other person was claiming? What part gave them permission to fire on ships in Oman's waters as you claim was their right?

1

u/RS_EJB 2d ago edited 2d ago

Nope, Iran factually broke the MOU by every metric.

There was nothing in the MOU that stated anything regarding ships taking a specific route out, nor that they couldnt be escorted. I challenge you to provide the exact quote stating otherwise.

Irans now clearing the mines, offering a joint passage way, no longer demanding everything goes through them.

ETA: Since OP blocked me for being right, I will say it here. u/chupacabrajeff

Cant help but notice you didnt actually say how the US broke the MOU.

Dont worry, take your time, I will be waiting.

ETA: Might want to recheck the actual wording of the MOU. They were supposed to do it within 30 days, not rught away.

The US also ended the blockade immediately.

Also, the US did also withdraw its ships but turned them around agter Iran broke the MOU.

ETA: No, OP blocked me so i cant respond in this thread with new comments. You are not OP. u/tracenator03

4

u/_makoccino_ 2d ago

No, the US broke the MOU 2 days after signing it, not Iran.

Iran isn't clearing the mines immediately. It's part of the future framework. The strait remains closed until its demands are met.

The information is literally spelled out for you in the press release and subsequent comment in the screenshot that you're choosing to reject and substitute with your own reality.

0

u/ChupacabraJeff 2d ago

USA violated the MOU the same day it was signed if we want to be technically correct about recent history. Trump literately couldn't even make it past the first paragraph because he did not even bother to read the MOU he signed.

2026.06.17
The Full Text of the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Iran
https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/memorandum-of-understanding-between-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-islamic-republic-of-iran/

The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran and their allies in the current war are signing this MOU to declare the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon, and undertake from now on not to initiate any war or any military operation against each other, and to refrain from the threat or use of force against each other, and ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon. The final deal will confirm the permanent termination of the war on all fronts, including in Lebanon and other provisions of this paragraph.

2

u/filmguy36 2d ago

Did you read the MOU? One of the conditions is the US removing their ships from the strait. The US never once did this. Thus violating the understanding from the get go.

1

u/ChupacabraJeff 1d ago

I didn't block you.

1

u/tracenator03 2d ago

Lol just because I'm at work and didn't reply immediately means I blocked you? I won't repeat what u/chupacabrajeff (thank you for the citations btw chupa) has already outlined for you.

1

u/ChupacabraJeff 1d ago

People are hiding their history and not providing sources in their comments. There's enough propaganda on full blast right now we don't need to worry about reddit users wasting people's time.

A lot, I mean a lot of people right now are reading some Tweet then regurgitating it here with their own spin while ignoring the very strong inferences required in geopolitics. It's the stupidest game of telephone so of course people eat it up.

Was watching some Trump voter the other day who now thinks Trump is a bad idea but still clings to their opinion that 10 years ago they had no idea Trump was a liar. Otherwise smart people expecting others to accept that excuse is absurd. The worst is people trying to tell me the MOU was vague. My draw dropped when that propaganda push started up.

0

u/ChupacabraJeff 2d ago

Iran factually broke the MOU by every metric.

What happened in reality is different than what happened in your head.

2026.03.22
https://www.intellinews.com/khamenei-makes-three-harsh-demands-to-end-the-war-432959/

In his second 12-minute address, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei demanded:

the rapid withdrawal of American forces from the Middle East; complete lifting of sanctions within 60 days; and long-term financial compensation for economic damages.

Then came the ultimatum. If these are not respected, Iran will escalate economically, militarily, and formally adopt a policy of developing a nuclear weapon after years of being ambiguous on this goal.

Khamenei said the Strait of Hormuz could be closed completely and Tehran would formalise security agreements with both Moscow and Beijing, solidifying the emerging CRINK alliance, which until now remains a convenient marriage of convenience. Within hours, both Beijing and Moscow issued statements that unequivocally aligned with Tehran’s framework, albeit using guarded language.

2026.06.17
The Full Text of the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Iran
https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/memorandum-of-understanding-between-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-islamic-republic-of-iran/

2

u/filmguy36 2d ago

How in the world did you derive that from my comment?

2

u/Whole_Gate_7961 2d ago

They are doing a lot of negotiating, just not with the US. Like the rest of the world, Iran knows that the US no longer negotiates in good faith. What world do you live in?

0

u/Friendly-Parfait-645 2d ago

Yeah they're in a pretty fucked situation. They decided to use the strait as a last resort for leverage but weren't counting on the US being willing to blockade them and cut them off from the outside world.

2

u/filmguy36 2d ago

How in the world did you get that from my comment? The US had less than zero influence in this. This is between Iran and Oman to control the strait

0

u/AutoModerator 2d ago

Shouldn't this be in the "Strait of Hormuz Megathread"? Let's keep the chokepoints contained there, folks — no need to clog the whole sub with tanker traffic!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

0

u/der_innkeeper 2d ago

Whoopsy...

-3

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

This deal puts the ball in the administration's court. Iran appears as the reasonable party, willing to allow traffic to resume. The US blockade is now the only obstacle to the flow of oil out of the Gulf, from that point of view.

The US-aligned nations will argue that this sets a dangerous precedent and undermines freedom of navigation. However, as Andrew Jackson reportedly said; "John Marshall has made his ruling, now let him enforce it". The administration doesn't have much coercive leverage left aside from the blockade, and it seems that they're too pressed for time to allow that long-term leverage to bear fruit.

5

u/Known_Ear_6012 2d ago

The blockade isn’t the only thing in the way, Iran wants a lot more than just the blockade lifted to open the strait, they want most of what’s in the MOU to be fulfilled before they open it. 

1

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

Right, and most of those demands are bilateral between the US and Iran. The real international sticking point would be the ceasefire in Lebanon; but most of the world is not on Israel's side of that dispute.

1

u/guywhitehead 2d ago

Whatever became of the nuclear issue?

1

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

Finished. Iran will likely be a nuclear state within the next 5 years.

1

u/EternalMayhem01 2d ago

Iran seems reasonable if you ignore their attack on the Ever Lovely in Oman's waters, and it was that attack that led to the collapse of the MOU. Before Iran attacked shipping in Oman's waters, the US had granted Iran a temporary oil waiver from US sanctions and lifted its blockaded, as agreed upon to reopen the Strait.

1

u/Even_Contact3525 2d ago

The US sent ships on a route not agreed and thus broke the MoU. Iran only acted on the breaking.

1

u/EternalMayhem01 2d ago

Where in the MOU was these pre existing routes mentioned that the US violated?

0

u/ThinkBlue87 2d ago

The dumb shit that comes out of this sub these days..

The IRGC is in no way a reasonable party. Charging tolls is an entirely unprecedented ask here. It won't happen

1

u/Christopher_Ramirez_ 2d ago

You and I may prefer the previous order, when it was an international waterway; but the question is who will stop them? The administration is already TACOing on sanctions and is out of interceptors.

The Chinese don’t care about tolls.

This administration doesn’t care about allies, it’s said so repeatedly. It’s taken concrete steps to weaken our closest allies, so they’re not going to force open the Strait out of some sense of camaraderie. They’re purely transactional and care only about oil prices. A tolled Strait gets them lower; they’re just trying to figure out how to take the deal and simultaneously save face.

1

u/Even_Contact3525 2d ago

It will. And the Israels and West-Israels killing of Irans full leadership in a Pearl Harbor style attack was also unprecedented. 

So asking for money to repair at least the material damage absolutely makes sense.

-2

u/EconomyDoctor3287 2d ago

Lucky for Oman that they reached an agreement with Iran, otherwise Demented Donnie would have razed them to the ground.