On Saturday, Iran announced a set of preconditions for reopening the vital Strait of Hormuz, demanding compensation for wartime damages. This move adds complexity to any potential negotiation to unlock the waterway crucial to the global economy.
Since late February, Iran has effectively blockaded the strait in response to attacks by the United States and Israel. Tehran now seeks to impose tolls for ships passing through and has resorted to attacking vessels that attempt to bypass its designated routes.
Repeated assaults within the strait, once freely navigable before hostilities erupted, ultimately caused the breakdown of an April ceasefire. Mediators have been urging both parties to revert to the terms established in a June memorandum to restore peace.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi highlighted that talks with Oman on the strait’s transit and management are nearing completion. However, he emphasized that reopening Hormuz hinges on additional conditions and redress for breaches of the June accord.
On Saturday, Security Chief Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr outlined a series of demands for reopening the strait, which include ceasing “war and aggression against Iran and its allies in Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen, and Iraq.”
He also demanded the lifting of a parallel US naval blockade of Iran, the end of sanctions, the release of frozen assets and compensation for wartime damage, according to remarks reported by Tasnim news agency.
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, meanwhile, said Hormuz’s reopening had “nothing to do with the negotiations between Iran and Oman”, adding that the “enemy is forced to accept Iran’s conditions for the opening of the strait”.
Repeated attacks
The comments came as transit through Hormuz has dropped significantly, with Iran targeting ships it accuses of skirting its preferred route through Iranian waters.
The United Arab Emirates’ foreign ministry on Saturday condemned what it called a “hostile Iranian attack that targeted a tanker belonging to ADNOC (Abu Dhabi National Oil Company) with a missile while it was transiting the Strait of Hormuz, without causing casualties”.
Later on Saturday, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said a ship was hit by a projectile off Oman in the Strait of Hormuz, causing a fire that was extinguished but no casualties. It was unclear whether they were referring to the same ship.
On Friday, ADNOC had put out a statement saying that since the start of the war, 15 of its vessels had been attacked in Hormuz, “including three vessels this week alone”.
Oman’s foreign ministry on Saturday condemned “repeated attacks on vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz”, without naming Iran.
It also said that “ongoing negotiations regarding navigation arrangements in the Strait of Hormuz are proceeding in a positive and constructive atmosphere”, and urged against any actions that might jeopardise the progress.
The previous Iran-US deal — meant to serve as a jumping-off point for negotiations on a permanent settlement — had said Iran and Oman would hash out future arrangements for the strait in discussion with other Gulf countries and “in line with the applicable international law”.
International law generally forbids tolling in such waterways.
Security agreement
Türkiye’s foreign minister said Saturday he expected Egypt to join a joint defence agreement between Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan designed to stabilize the region, calling the country a “natural partner on all issues”.
“I believe that at the next stage Egypt will also be among us in the alliance. We already act toward one another as if we were alliance members,” Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said in an interview.
A drone struck US assets at an Egyptian port on the Mediterranean last month, marking the first drone attack on Egyptian territory since the outbreak of the Iran war.
Fidan said the agreement does not target a specific country.
“There is no common threat that we have put in writing,” he said, according to the news agency.
Pakistan’s foreign ministry said Friday the pact meant an attack on any member would be regarded as an attack on all, adding it was “intended to strengthen collective deterrence”.