• Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Pakistan have signed a defence pact committing each country to treat “an attack on one as an attack on all”.
• Ankara has maintained that the deal remains fully compatible with Turkiye’s obligations to NATO.
• Iranian lawmaker Hassan Ghashghavi stated that Iran and Oman have established a framework for a Strait of Hormuz protocol, though any conclusive deal requires approval at “higher levels”.
• Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has said that while his nation does not seek war or expansionism, it will not yield to “coercion”.

Bahrain welcomes Saudi-Turkiye-Pakistan defence pact

Bahrain’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has welcomed the signing of the Saudi-Turkiye-Pakistan defence pact as “a strategic partnership between equal parties, each of which contributes to it with its capabilities”.

In a statement, it said Bahrain considered the deal “a qualitative addition that complements and enhances the joint defence system of the GCC countries”, referring to the Gulf Cooperation Council.

Pakistan-Saudi-Turkey alliance actually creates a new regional order

On Friday, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed a mutual defence pact, building on a similar agreement between Riyadh and Islamabad last year.

But the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, as the pact is known, has raised questions about the shifting power dynamics in the Middle East.

Experts have speculated that the deal may mark the beginning of a wider regional alliance that sits between Israel and Iran, wary of both.

Analysts note that the three countries have been cautious not to antagonize regional adversaries. It remains unclear the extent to which the pact would force its members to defend their alliance partners.

Saudi Arabia signs defence pact as ‘strategic hedging’

Former US envoy to Tunisia, Gordon Gray said Saudi Arabia is hedging its bets by signing a mutual defence agreement with Turkiye and Pakistan.

“I see it as strategic hedging on the part of Saudi Arabia,” Gray said.

“With the tepid US approach under this administration toward alliances, it makes sense for both Turkiye and for the Saudis to diversify their defence relationships,” Gray said.

Mecca defence deal has ‘very real potential’

Harlan Ullman, chairman of The Killowen Group and a retired senior naval officer, says the defence deal between Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Pakistan could complement their potential shortcomings.

Ullman said that the arrangement offers distinct advantages to each participant based on their strategic needs.

“Pakistan needs the money, hence Saudi Arabia. Pakistan has nuclear weapons, implicitly, that might be a deterrent for Saudi Arabia,” Ullman said. “Turkey and Erdogan want to lead the Muslim world. Turkiye has a powerful defence industry, so in that regard, this has very real potential.”

However, Ullman cautioned that it remains too early to tell how the declaration might play out in practice, noting that the pact hinges on specific phrasing that leaves room for interpretation during a crisis.

“We believe it says an attack on one should be considered [an attack on all] – and ‘should be’ is the operative phrase, because that does not mean necessarily,” he said.

“But suppose India and Pakistan get at it. Supposing Iran attacks Saudi Arabia. Supposing the Houthis and Yemen attack Saudi Arabia,” Ullman added. “Does that bring in Turkiye? Does that bring in Pakistan? That remains to be seen.”

US allies ‘looking elsewhere’ as traditional alliances weaken, analyst says

The Chairman of The Killowen Group and retired senior naval officer, Harlan Ullman, who says the new defence pact between the Saudis, Turkey, and Pakistan is the result of a weakening of traditional alliances during Trump’s second term.

“The Trump Administration has said that allies have got to fend for themselves,” Ullman said.

“What’s clear to me is that our allies are looking elsewhere,” Ullman said. “I think that in Saudi Arabia in particular, given the fact that Trump has oscillated and almost whimsically so, with the war that is going on with Iran… you bet our alliances are really losing credibility of the American persistence, and this is one of the reasons why that’s happening.”

“The basis for our alliance, in the Middle East, in the Persian Gulf, with our NATO allies and certainly with Asia, has certainly been shaken,” the retired senior naval officer added.

Palestinian Presidency praises Mecca pact as step for ‘collective security’

The Palestinian Presidency has welcomed the signing of the defence pact between Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Pakistan, describing it as an important strategic step to strengthen security and cooperation across the Islamic world.

In a statement, the presidency affirmed Palestine’s aspiration that the deal serve as a starting point for strengthening the “collective Arab and Islamic security system”.

It emphasized that a unified security framework is essential to protecting the region while supporting Palestinian rights and the legitimate struggle to “end the Israeli occupation and establish an independent state with East Jerusalem as its capital”.

Mecca defense pact raises questions over US role in Middle East

While the administration of US President Donald Trump has yet to weigh in on the pact, analysts say the agreement is an effort by the three countries to reorient themselves after the turmoil of the Iran war.

“This is one of the first major geopolitical signs that the regional order is being reshaped by the US-Israeli war on Iran,” Sina Toossi, an analyst at the Center for International Policy, said.

“The significance is less about a formal military alliance than about what it says regarding how regional states are reassessing security.”

Toossi pointed to the long-running alliance between the US and Saudi Arabia. For decades, the two countries have enjoyed a strong relationship, hinged on shared security interests. But the pact could be a sign that Saudi Arabia is looking to expand its security alliances.

Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, Pakistan pact shows recognition of need for ‘regional multilateralism’

Patrick Bury, a lecturer in defence and strategic studies at the University of Bath, says the agreement between Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan could be “tested quite quickly” if the Houthis were to attack Saudi Arabia again, or if Iran restarts attacks.

“This agreement … is a recognition of a need for a network or regional multilateralism,” Bury said. He said the pact’s “number-one goal is to increase deterrence”.

“And try to stabilize a very unstable region for the last three years or so,” Bury added.

Iran is not target of Saudi-Pakistan-Turkiye defence pact: Turkish FM

Turkey's Foreign Minister, Hakan Fidan, says Iran is not the target of the defence pact signed between Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan – and nobody is a target as long as they don’t attack one of the pact members, according to Reuters.

The preparation of the Mecca deterrence pact was not on the day of signing but days or weeks before the summit. The pact may not be just a response to the weakened position certain countries in the Middle East feel. The pact could even address the Ansarullah Houthis in Yemen when looking at Saudi Arabia.

US likely to welcome Mecca pact provided it doesn’t become ‘anti-Israel’

David Des Roches, an associate professor at the National Defense University’s Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies, has described the defence pact signed by Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan as a good move that will be welcomed by the US.

“So long as it doesn’t metastasize into some sort of malign anti-Israel thing, which I think is a very remote possibility, I think it’s positive,” he said.

The alliance would benefit from Turkiye and Pakistan’s robust defence industries, “a more advanced one in the case of Turkey, less advanced, more machine-age in the case of Pakistan”, he said.

Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, could help finance its two allies. “In both countries, the capacity exceeds their ability to pay for it, and they can’t really maintain national defence industries without a market,” said Des Roches.

“So there’s money, there’s markets, and there’s the possibility for advanced training and education,” he added. “From an American perspective, if our partners have increased capacity, that’s burden sharing. And that’s been the aim of successive American administrations since, really, the end of World War II.”

Will Pakistan-Saudi-Turkiye defence pact change US strategy?

The Trump administration has not offered an official response in the hours since Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan signed a landmark mutual defence agreement in Mecca.

The muted reaction, which persisted into Saturday, likely underscores the multilayered – and still emerging – implications of the new deal for US strategy, according to analysts.

Considered by many to lay the groundwork for what could be one of the most significant regional power shifts in decades, the deal comes within the context of the US-Israeli war against Iran and Israel’s increasingly aggressive military actions in the region.

Some analysts see the agreement as a reflection of growing wariness towards an unpredictable US government, potentially presaging a wider security realignment that could transform the Middle East.

Marine traffic continues to drop in Strait of Hormuz

Marine traffic in the critical Strait of Hormuz has dropped further this week, though Iran says a deal with Oman to manage the waterway is near.

Only eight commercial vessels transited the strait on Thursday, a drop from 15 on Tuesday and 12 last Thursday, according to data firm Kpler.

Before the start of the US-Israel war on Iran, about 140 ships passed through the strait daily, carrying 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas shipments.

 

US to lift Iranian port blockade once shipping resumes ‘without impediments’

Reuters reports, citing a US official, that Washington expects Iran and Oman to reach an agreement soon that could reopen the Strait of Hormuz and allow normal commercial shipping to resume.

“There is progress between Oman and Iran on the strait, and we expect a deal soon,” the official said.

The official added that once an agreement is announced restoring commercial shipping “without impediments”, the United States will lift its blockade of Iranian ports.

Any further US steps would remain strictly tied to Iran’s implementation of its commitments, the official added.

Iran says ‘general framework’ reached with Oman on Strait of Hormuz

The most significant development from Tehran is the apparent move towards a final understanding with Oman over the Strait of Hormuz.

The spokesperson of the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee of Iran’s parliament says a general framework of understanding has been reached with Oman, pending final approval from a higher level.

But it seems that Iranian officials want to make these arrangements with Oman as part of a much bigger regional security framework.

The deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, says the security of the Gulf must be provided by the Gulf states, not by foreign powers.

Meanwhile, President Masoud Pezeshkian says that Iran does not seek any confrontation with its Gulf neighbors, while accusing the United States and Israel of trying to unite the Gulf states against Iran.

The foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, says that Muslim countries should be united and not depend on foreign powers.

So, the message from Tehran today is that Iranian officials seem to be keen to make these arrangements over the Strait of Hormuz with Oman as part of a much bigger regional security framework.

But the question now is whether or not these arrangements with Oman and the political understanding will guarantee the return of safe passage for vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

US Senators introduce resolution to end Trump’s ‘illegal war’ on Iran

“We just introduced a resolution to put a stop to President Trump’s illegal war with Iran,” US Senator John Hickenlooper wrote on X.

“American lives have been lost. Gas and fertilizer prices have skyrocketed. Our military stockpiles drained,” he added.

“End this war. NOW.”

Oil prices climb as uncertainty over Hormuz keeps markets on edge

Oil prices climbed sharply through Friday after starting the day under pressure, as traders continued to react to uncertainty surrounding the Strait of Hormuz and negotiations involving Iran and Oman, Reuters reports.

Brent crude was trading at about $79.08 a barrel early on Friday before settling at $83.55, a rise of $4.47, or about 5.7 percent, from its morning level.

US West Texas Intermediate (WTI) moved from about $74.69 to $78.18, gaining $3.49, or about 4.7 percent.

The rebound came as attention remained focused on whether an agreement could restore shipping through Hormuz, while Iran also considers legislation that could restrict US and Israeli vessels from using the strait.

Despite the late-week recovery, Brent finished the week down more than 8 percent, while WTI lost more than 7 percent, underscoring the volatility caused by shifting expectations over the US-Iran conflict and the future of shipping through the strait.

Prolonged disruption of Hormuz could erode Iran’s leverage

Iran has turned its ability to restrict commercial passage through the Strait of Hormuz into a potent economic weapon in the war imposed by the United States and Israel.

IMF PortWatch data shows that in the seven days ending August 2, an average of only about four ships per day passed through the strait, compared with about 90 during the corresponding week of 2025. Estimated transit volume fell from 3.5 million to about 143,000 metric tons per day. Both indicators declined by approximately 96 percent.

This was not a temporary collapse in traffic but a sustained disruption. Since February 28, both vessel traffic and estimated tonnage have remained far below their levels in the previous year, with only brief recoveries.

Tehran has therefore already demonstrated that it can impose severe disruption on commercial traffic. The question is no longer whether Iran can disrupt trade through Hormuz, but how effectively it can convert that disruption into political leverage, and for how long.

Missile targets vessel of UAE’s ADNOC in Strait of Hormuz, no injuries

A vessel belonging to the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) was targeted by a missile while crossing the Strait of Hormuz earlier today, according to the UAE’s WAM state news agency.

“The attack did not result in any injuries and the situation was brought under control,” it said.

IRGC says Hormuz reopening conditional on US ‘fully accepting Iran’s conditions’, not Oman deal

Sardar Mohebi, spokesperson for Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), says the opening of the Strait of Hormuz is subject to “specific mechanisms and conditions” of Iran, which has no connection to ongoing negotiations with Oman, Iranian state news agency Tasnim reports.

“For us, the Strait of Hormuz is not merely an economic waterway, but rather a component of geographical and strategic power,” Mohebi explained.

The spokesperson added the opening of the waterway was conditional on the US “fully accepting Iran’s conditions and ceasing to interfere in the regional negotiations”.

“Whenever the US accepts Iran’s conditions, the Strait of Hormuz will definitely open,” he said.

UAE says Iranian attack on tanker constitutes ‘flagrant violation’ of UN resolution

The United Arab Emirates has expressed its “strong condemnation of the Iranian aggression” against an ADNOC tanker while it was transiting through the Strait of Hormuz.

In a statement, the country’s Foreign Ministry said the attack constituted a “flagrant violation” of UN Security Council Resolution 2817, which emphasises freedom of navigation and rejects the targeting of commercial vessels in international waters.

“The ministry stressed that targeting commercial shipping and using the Strait of Hormuz as a tool of pressure or economic blackmail constitutes acts of piracy by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and poses a direct threat to the stability of the region and its people, as well as to global energy security,” it added.

But the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz is not caused by Iran. Tehran responded to Netanyahu when his warplanes were bombing the oil depots outside Tehran while assassinating Khamenei on February 28th.

The recently reimposed counter-blockade by Trump is a resumption of previous counter-blockades therefore considered as a continuation. This brings us to question: When is a counter-blockade a violation of international law?

A counter-blockade violates international law when it fails to meet the dual requirements of jus ad bellum (the right to use force) and jus in bello (the lawful conduct of warfare). Because a blockade is an act of war, any retaliatory counter-blockade must be strictly justified as a lawful act of self-defense, authorized by the UN Security Council, and executed in accordance with international humanitarian law.

First, Trump has no right to use of force (jus ad bellum) because he uses force on political, not military grounds. That already is a violation of the UN Charter.

Secondly, his war is unlawful (jus ad bellum) because it is a war across borders, meaning from countries on another continent, clearly indicating that Iran is not attacking the territory of the United States. He just had chosen to decide to defy international law by not asking approval from the UNSC. That makes his war for another reason unlawful.

The UN Security Council Resolution 2817 just ignores other rules of international law.

Iran says Hormuz agreement ‘very close’, accuses US of violating memorandum

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says Tehran is “very close to an agreement” over the Strait of Hormuz, while accusing the United States of violating a memorandum of understanding previously reached in Pakistan.

Araghchi said at a news conference alongside President Masoud Pezeshkian, that Iran had been implementing Clause 5 of the memorandum and that traffic was supposed to return to normal within a month, adding that it had reached “60 percent of normal conditions within two weeks”.

However, Araghchi accused the US of seeking to establish new routes through the Strait of Hormuz despite warnings from Tehran.

Araghchi said negotiations were now focused on establishing a temporary shipping route before a permanent route is agreed. “Before reaching a new route, a temporary route will be considered as the basis for the main route,” he said, adding that negotiations had been held between the two countries’ military and naval forces.

Araghchi says US must compensate Iran for MoU violations in order for Hormuz to reopen

In comments shared on his Telegram page, Araghchi said reopening the strait hinges on other conditions beyond any understanding with Oman, including US compensation to Iran for alleged violations of the Islamabad MoU.

Iran says reopening Strait of Hormuz ‘conditional, not automatic’

Iran is trying to exercise a level of control and authority over the Strait of Hormuz, and has consistently said the situation in the strait is not going to return to what it was before the war.

We heard two important messages and statements, one from a spokesperson for the IRGC and the other from the foreign minister.

First, they are saying the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz is conditional, not automatic – meaning that reaching a deal between Oman and Iran does not necessarily pave the way for the reopening of the strait.

A second point was the rejection of the TSS, the trajectory through which ships and vessels can transit through the strategically important waterway and chokepoint. The Iranians are saying there will be a new pathway, and that the geographical coordinates have been agreed upon between Oman and Iran.

Iran is saying this should be conducted bilaterally, firmly rejecting any intervention from third parties.

Lastly, Iran is trying to assert control over the strait, not just as a commercial waterway, but as a point of leverage, strategically speaking.

Iranian mistrust of US hangs over Hormuz negotiations with Oman

Based on what Araghchi previously have said, as well as other Iranian officials over the past few days and weeks, the Iranians are saying the United States did not fulfill its commitments related to the memorandum of understanding.

In that regard, Iran is saying the memorandum of understanding was not fully implemented, that new maritime arrangements are needed, and that a revision is necessary. Last but not least, they are saying that neither the memorandum of understanding nor an agreement between Oman and Iran can necessarily reopen the strait, given Iran’s mistrust of the United States.

So, right now, they are saying any reopening of the strait comes down to practical arrangements.

If a deal is agreed between Oman and Iran, it could pave the way for both sides to return to the memorandum of understanding and resume talks. However, this prospect for diplomacy is overshadowed by a cloud of mistrust.

There is also a long list of other controversial issues that remain, such as frozen assets, sanctions and the nuclear issue – all of which require a certain amount of trust.

 

Iran wants to stop MoU violations from being ‘normalized’

Abas Aslani, a senior research fellow at the Center for Middle East Strategic Studies, says Tehran is demanding compensation from the US over its alleged MoU violations in order to stop violations from being normalized and curb future violations.

Such compensation, Aslani said, could come in the form of sanctions relief or access to frozen assets, which were outstanding issues in previous rounds of negotiations.

Iran “sees the [Islamabad] MoU as the only framework available”, he added.

Gulf states wary of Iran’s compensation demand to reopen Hormuz

Regional states are concerned by Iran’s demand for compensation for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, says Abdulla Banndar Al-Etaibi, an assistant professor of international affairs at Qatar University.

He said Iran was treating negotiations with Oman over navigation in the strait as part of wartime negotiations with the United States. “I think they’re identical for the Iranians … they want to be compensated for what they call American violations of the MoU.”

“What’s the price of reopening the Strait of Hormuz? Is it going to be giving more frozen assets to the Iranians for freedom of navigation? So, this doesn’t come actually as a principle, but as a bargaining chip the Iranians are deploying against the Americans and the region. This is a big concern for the regional countries.”

“If Iran is asking for money to open the Strait of Hormuz, then after one month or two months, they may come back and ask for more money to open it again. So, it will be a non-ending negotiations and this is something that is not helping trust in the negotiations and also the freedom of navigation,” the analyst added.

He said the best outcome requires returning to US-Iran negotiations, in addition to the ongoing Iran-Oman track. “And then, we need to find some way to compromise, when it comes to frozen assets and when it comes to the Strait of Hormuz, to push things forward.”

Iran views administration of Hormuz as ‘indispensable’

Cyrus Schayegh, professor of international history and politics at the Geneva Graduate Institute, says Iran and the US appear to have adjusted their positions on the Strait of Hormuz as Iran-Oman negotiations on the waterway persist.

Iran, for its part, still insists that it must hold a “key administrative role” in managing the waterway, Schayegh said, which it sees as “absolutely indispensable” and “will not negotiate” on.

However, Tehran has indicated it may be willing to let go of the idea of collecting a fee for the waterway.

The US, on the other hand, appears to have become “more realistic about what it can do vis a vis Iran militarily and more accepting of an Iran-Oman deal” for the waterway, Schayegh said.

Iran’s army spokesman says US ‘has no choice but to accept’ Iranian order in Hormuz

Iran’s army spokesman Amir Akraminia has said Iran’s new order in the Strait of Hormuz is “irreversible”, despite US wishes.

“The United States has no choice but to accept the existing situation; otherwise, it will incur costs far greater than those it has faced in the past,” Akraminia said in comments carried by Iran’s official IRNA news agency.

‘No way for Hormuz to return to pre-war situation’

Iran and Oman are close to an agreement on the future administration of the Strait of Hormuz, with the main obstacle being US pressure on Oman to adopt a position more closely aligned with Washington’s, says Ali Akbar Dareini, a Tehran-based researcher at the Center for Strategic Studies.

Dareini said Iran views its future control of the strait as critical to its national security, after months of US attacks that Tehran says were launched from bases in the region.

Dareini said the ongoing negotiation process between Iran and Oman presents the US with a “good opportunity… to get out of this quagmire” by recognising Iran and Oman as the states that will “determine the future” of Hormuz.

“There is absolutely no way for the Strait of Hormuz to return to the pre-war situation,” he continued. “The geopolitics of the region have changed.”

Gulf nations face ‘limited options’ as Iran, Oman hold talks to reopen Hormuz

Abdulla Banndar Al-Etaibi, an assistant professor of international affairs at Qatar University, says that while Gulf nations are reacting positively the finalisation of Iran-Oman negotiations over the Strait of Hormuz, they have little recourse if Iran demands compensation for reopening it.

“Everybody is looking at it positively,” he said. “They want something to come out of it, to let freedom of navigation be reaffirmed by both parties.

“Oman is coordinating with the US, with mediators, with regional countries as well, because this has to do with shared interests in the region,” he said.

However, he cautioned that Iran is “dealing with freedom of navigation as something they need to be exchanged with something else”. This represents a “red flag” for regional countries.

“At the end of the day, the regional countries have limited choices and options, because basically you don’t want to attack. You try to defend yourself, defend your sovereignty, your authority as well.”

Gulf states therefore have “limited options.”

Iran on Saturday said that it’s close to a deal with Oman on Hormuz, but added that the strategic waterway will only be reopened after the US accepts Tehran’s conditions, including compensation from Washington.

Gulf nations export most of their oil and gas through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s security chief says US ‘must correct behaviour’, lists conditions for reopening Hormuz 

The secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, is the latest Iranian official to speak about Iran’s “conditions” to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

In a statement published by Iran’s IRIB broadcaster, Zolghadr said the US must “correct its behaviour” and listed the following demands for the US:

• End threats against Iran and its “sacred values”
• Permanently halt military action against Iran and its regional allies
• Withdraw US naval and air forces involved in a blockade against Iran
• Compensate Iran for damage caused during the recent conflict
• Lift US sanctions
• Release Iran’s frozen assets

“The Supreme National Security Council will not retreat from these demands, whether in war or in negotiations,” he said.

Iran lays out conditions to reopen Strait of Hormuz

First, Iranians are saying that the Strait of Hormuz is going to be conditionally reopened, dependent upon the courses of action taken by the United States.

Second, Iran is rejecting the previous trajectory used for ships and vessels to transit through this geostrategically significant chokepoint, saying that there are new geographical coordinates for the ships and vessels, indicative of the level of control and authority Iran is trying to practice pertaining to the strait.

Third, they are talking about a temporary trajectory, saying that further diplomacy can pave the way for a long-term solution about the strait.

And last but not the least, it’s not just a commercial waterway for Iran, as they are trying to use it as a strategic leverage.

In this very intricate situation, we are dealing with a lot of points of contention, interrelated to each other, including the naval blockade by the United States.

And speaking of the United States, we know that the prospects of the talks between Washington and Tehran is also going to be influenced by whatever comes as a result of talks between Muscat and Tehran.

Iran’s list of conditions ‘a deal-breaker for US’: Expert

Richard Weitz, an international security expert at the NATO Defense College, says the US is highly unlikely to accept Iran’s demand for compensation or any other conditions it has set for reopening the Strait of Hormuz.

“President Trump has explicitly excluded that [paying Iran compensation] and it wouldn’t have support in Congress to fund such a proposal,” Weitz said.

“In fact, this whole list of conditions … Iran has reinserted is going to be a deal-breaker for the White House,” Weitz added.

US ‘credibility’ as ‘good faith ally’ suffered during war on Iran

Marlin Hardinger, a former US State Department official, says one of the losses the US has suffered is its “credibility” during the war on Iran, as Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan sign a defence pact.

“This is what’s been feared from in Washington – if the region doesn’t see Washington as a good faith ally on the defensive capacity and really step in and protect it, it [Gulf states] always had the option of going out and forming its own alliance,” Hardinger said.

“In the short term, if it brings some capacity to help out on immediate defensive issues against Iran, that’s fine. But, long term, it could be the beginning of challenging the US’s role in the Gulf, and that would be damaging to probably the Gulf states and the United States for years to come,” he explained.

Entire US-Iran negotiating process ‘needs to be rethought’

More from Richard Weitz, the security expert. He says the US-Iran MoU signed back in June failed because it did not clear up competing interpretations that ultimately sparked renewed conflict.

“This agreement was reached rapidly and hastily in order to basically paper over the differences between the two sides,” Weitz said.

He suggested a better path forward would be for Iran and the US to “adopt a narrow approach” in negotiations, forging “specific deals on specific topics, perhaps with different sets of stakeholders.”

“Some of the issues, such as the Strait of Hormuz, cannot be resolved by the US and Iran alone,” Weitz said. “Others, such as the nuclear issue, probably could be but would need to have a more specific action plan.”

“So, I think the whole process needs to be rethought,” he added.

Vance says Iran told US it has no plans for Hormuz tolls

Vice President JD Vance says Iran has told the US that it has “no plans” to impose tolls on the Strait of Hormuz.

“You see, some people within the Iranian system, of course, talk about tolling. The Iranians have told us they have no plans to toll the Strait of Hormuz,” Vance said during an interview with Fox News.

He also said Washington expects Gulf oil and gas exports to return to pre-war levels. “That is what the Iranians have told us that they are going to do,” he said. “That’s what the entire Gulf coalition wants to do as well. But, you know, we don’t trust, we verify. We actually look not at people’s words, but people’s deeds.”

How the war against Iran impacted energy shipments in the Strait of Hormuz

Before the US-Israeli war against Iran started, approximately.20 percent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) passed through the Strait of Hormuz. But for more than five months, the flow of energy in the waterway has been hugely disrupted, as Iran seeks to exert control over the strait, including by attacking vessels it accuses of “violating” its protocol.

• Iran first announced it was closing the strait in the aftermath of the Israeli attacks on Tehran's oil depots on February 28th.
• While the waterway was briefly reopened mid-April, Iran quickly reimposed restrictions because of the US’s own blockade on Iranian ports.
• After the US-Iran MoU was signed on June 17, the strait was meant to be reopened; however, traffic remained low while Iran claimed transiting vessels still had to coordinate with its authorities. According to PortWatch data, only 513 ships transited the strait in the first 18 days after it reopened between June 18 and July 5, averaging just 28 ships a day compared to the pre-war average of 140.
• Traffic took a further hit after the US and Iran resumed attacks against each other’s interests in mid-July – and the strait now remains largely closed.
• Between Monday and Thursday this week, just 33 vessels crossed the strait, compared to 50 in the week-ago period, Reuters reported.

Qatar condemns Iranian attack on UAE tanker in Hormuz

Qatar has condemned an Iranian missile attack targeting an Emirati tanker affiliated with the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) as it passed through the Strait of Hormuz.

In a statement, Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the attack as a “flagrant violation” of international law and freedom of maritime navigation.

The ministry also rejected what it described as Iran’s use of the Strait of Hormuz as a “bargaining chip” and called for the waterway to be reopened without conditions.

It warned that the continued closure of the waterway threatens the “vital interests” of countries in the region and the global economy.

See comment on UAE accusation towards Iran

Saudi Arabia condemns Iranian attack on UAE tanker

Saudi Arabia has added to the condemnations, calling Iran’s attack on a UAE tanker an “assault on the security and safety of maritime navigation, and on the security of global energy supplies”.

In a statement, the Foreign Ministry expressed the kingdom’s strongest “condemnation and denunciation” of the attack, adding that it is a “grave violation” of international law.

“The Kingdom holds Iran responsible for the consequences of its continued aggression and demands that Iran immediately cease these violations to preserve the security, stability and safety of the region,” the ministry added.

“The Kingdom reiterates its full solidarity with the sisterly United Arab Emirates and its support for all measures taken by the UAE to preserve its sovereignty and resources,” it concluded.

See comment on UAE accusation towards Iran

Bahrain condemns attack on UAE oil tanker

Bahrain has condemned a suspected Iranian attack on a UAE oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

The vessel belonging to the Abu Dhabi Oil Company was struck by a missile in the early hours of Saturday. No injuries were reported.

Bahrain’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the attack as a violation of international law and “a grave threat to maritime navigation and global energy supply”.

Bahrain affirmed its solidarity with the UAE and called on the UN Security Council to take “decisive measures” to protect maritime navigation in the strait.

See comment on UAE accusation towards Iran

Oman condemns ‘repeated attacks on ships in Hormuz’

Oman’s government has said it condemns the “repeated attacks on ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz”, calling such attacks a “violation of international law and the sovereignty of territorial waters”.

In a statement shared by the country’s official Oman News Agency, the country’s Foreign Ministry also said negotiations over arrangements for navigation in the Strait of Hormuz were progressing positively and stressed the need for all parties to avoid any actions that could jeopardize their success.

See comment on UAE accusation towards Iran.

Syrian government condemns strike on ADNOC tanker in Hormuz

The Syrian government has condemned the attack on an oil tanker operated by the UAE’s Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) while transiting the Strait of Hormuz, the Foreign Ministry has said in a statement.

The ministry reaffirmed in its statement that the country backs Saudi Arabia and rejects any acts targeting the security of maritime navigation in international waters.

It stressed “the importance of respecting the sovereignty of states and safeguarding international trade routes in a manner that contributes to preserving regional security and stability”.

See comment on UAE accusation towards Iran.

Vance says US seeking Iranian commitment ‘not to fire at commercial vessels’

Continuing his interview with Fox News, US Vice-President JD Vance said the Strait of Hormuz needs to be cleared of mines and safe passage for commercial vessels guaranteed in order for traffic to bounce back.

“What’s been going on for the past week or so is that the Iranians and the Gulf countries, particularly Oman, have been talking about how to ensure the safe flow of traffic,” Vance said. “The one problem, of course, is the Iranians laid a large number of mines at the beginning of the war. And so what we’re really working through now is how you can actually set up a traffic scheme so that the ships that pass can pass through safely. That includes, of course, demining.”

The US is also seeking “a commitment from the Iranians that they’re not going to fire at commercial vessels,” Vance added.

See comment on UAE accusation towards Iran

Iran’s position on the Strait of Hormuz

Several Iranian officials have spoken today about the status of negotiations with Oman on a new protocol for the Strait of Hormuz, as well as the conditions for reopening the shipping channel. Here are the main points from their remarks:

• Iran’s FM Abbas Araghchi said Iran and Oman are “very ⁠close” to agreeing on a new arrangement for Hormuz shipping. However, he said that other conditions, including US compensation for Iran, must be met before the strait is reopened.
• IRGC spokesperson Sardar Mohebi echoed Araghchi’s remarks, saying reopening is subject to “specific mechanisms and conditions” that are unrelated to the ongoing negotiations with Oman.
• Reopening is conditional on the US “fully accepting Iran’s conditions and ceasing to interfere in the regional negotiations”, said Mohebi.
• Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, laid out six specific conditions he said the US must meet for Hormuz to reopen. They are: the US ending its threats to Iran; halting military action against Iran and its regional allies; withdrawing naval and air forces involved in blockading Iran; compensating Iran for damage caused in the conflict; lifting sanctions and unfreezing Iranian assets.

US military claims 53 vessels redirected to enforce Iran blockade

The US military’s Central Command (CENTCOM) claims that it has redirected 53 commercial vessels as part of its naval blockade on Iran.

If proved, that would be two more than the 51 vessels it claimed to have redirected yesterday.

See comment on UAE accusation towards Iran

Vessel struck off the coast of Oman: UKMTO

The UK’s Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) says it has received a report of a vessel being struck about 18 nautical miles (33 nautical kilometers) off the coast of Oman’s Khasab town.

UKMTO cited a “verified source” as saying an “unknown projectile” hit the vessel, causing a fire.

The fire has been extinguished and the vessel, along with all its crew, have been reported safe, added UKMTO.

“verified source”

The UKMTO is part of the British navy, whose government is a co-belligerent as it allows the US to carry out attacks in Iran from British soil.

Iranians to stand ‘until the end’ with leadership’s decision: President

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian says the Iranians will stand “until the end” with whatever the leadership decides, according to the Fars news agency.

“The war commanders know better than you and me whether we should fight or not. They know their own power. The leadership decides, and whatever decision they make, we will stand until the end,” he said.

The president explained that they will stand “until our death”, adding, “I am not afraid of fighting and staying; not only am I not afraid, but we often put ourselves in danger by doing so.

“Now, they may assassinate us one day; well, let them,” he added.

Iranian general says US, Israel ‘completely failed’ in war

Brigadier General Hassan Hassanzadeh, of the IRGC’s Tehran Corps, has said that the US and Israel have “completely failed to achieve their goals against” Iran.

“The people’s power and the all-encompassing readiness of the Basij have transformed Iran into one of the major powers in the region and the world,” he said, quoted by Iran’s Tasnim news agency.

“Today, the leaders of the United States and the Zionist regime have no answers for the public, intellectuals, and the people about their repeated failures,” he added.

Pentagon official says US has enough munitions ‘to execute war’

The principal deputy director at the US Defence Department’s Defence Innovation Unit (DIU) says the military has enough munitions for its war against Iran, following reports that stocks of vital air defence weapons, such as ballistic missile interceptors, have been diminished by the conflict.

“We have sufficient munitions for the task at hand,” Jarred Conley said. “The department has everything it needs today to execute a war.”

Pentagon orders defence firms to ramp up weapons production amid Iran war

The Trump administration has asked the US defence industry to rapidly escalate the production and delivery of weapons, including munitions that are in extreme shortage due to the war with Iran, The Washington Post has reported, quoting a Defense Department memo.

Deputy Defense Secretary Steve Feinberg wrote to industry leaders last Wednesday, noting that they have to submit plans to “drive significantly faster, more aggressive delivery schedules and/or increased production for critical capabilities,” within 21 days.

“Years-long development cycles are not acceptable,” Feinberg wrote. “We must dramatically accelerate our program schedules and expand our production capacity now.”

There have been multiple reports of the US running short on munitions stockpiles, and more critically, of anti-missile Patriot interceptors. Trump earlier said that the army has “massive amounts” of munitions, posting on Truth Social that “large amounts are being manufactured and shipped to the US as needed.”

A Pentagon official on Saturday said that the US has enough munitions ‘to execute war’.

“We have sufficient munitions for the task at hand,” Jarred Conley, the principal deputy director at the US Defence Department’s Defence Innovation Unit (DIU), said.

“The department has everything it needs today to execute a war.”