Reports have emerged that Iran and Oman, littoral states of the Strait of Hormuz, have narrowed their differences to a concrete level regarding navigation through the strait.

Citing two Iranian officials, The New York Times (NYT) reported on the 3rd (local time) that the two countries are nearing an agreement under which vessels entering the strait would follow routes closer to waters controlled by Iran, while outbound vessels would follow paths closer to waters controlled by Oman.

The officials also stated that a service fee would be charged to ships passing through the strait, citing costs required for environmental impact, security, and personnel deployment, and that the revenue would be split evenly between the two countries.

Regarding this, Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, stated that the two countries have exchanged maps containing routes through which ships can navigate the strait.

Before the war, navigation through the Strait of Hormuz was possible in accordance with the internationally agreed Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS).

To prevent vessel collisions in the narrow strait, ships could travel in only one direction along northbound and southbound separated lanes, most of which were within Oman's territorial waters.

However, Baghaei explained, "Rather than two or three separate lanes, we are discussing with Oman a single lane that allows two-way traffic."

While the United States presses for free navigation through the Strait of Hormuz as before the war, Iran insists on its sovereign control over it.

In the early stages of the war, Iran seemed to focus on tolls, but it later shifted its emphasis toward formalizing control in a way that requires Iranian authorization for vessel navigation.

Given that the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz proved to be an effective leverage tool to gain the upper hand in war and negotiations, and that Iran also endured heavy human and material losses to seize control of the strait, the possibility of it making concessions is very low.

On this day, U.S. President Donald Trump claimed that he is discussing with Iran a plan to fully open the Strait of Hormuz by the 4th and that he would not stand for the imposition of tolls, but given that mediator Oman is a party to the navigation negotiations, there is room for him to accept a navigation agreement.

This is because the U.S. could frame it as "an agreement between Iran and Oman," casting itself as a third party and stepping aside from direct responsibility and international criticism.

The tolls strongly opposed by President Trump could also be imposed under a changed name, such as a service fee.

Iranian authorities have also stopped using the term "toll" and are instead calling it a service fee.

The NYT pointed out that if an agreement between Iran and Oman is announced, the U.S. and the international community may have to pay a heavy price by recognizing Iran's control over the strait, which used to be open international waters.

President Trump had expected to attack Iran under the pretext of eliminating its nuclear program to reduce its capabilities and influence, but instead, Iran has ended up holding the card of control over the Strait of Hormuz, the report noted.

There are also skeptical views regarding the Iran-Oman Hormuz agreement.

This is because a resolution of this kind amounts to capitulation to Iran, and because Omani waters are laden with Iranian mines, ultimately requiring cooperation from Iran.

The NYT also pointed out that Iranian authorities are not convinced that the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz would halt renewed U.S. strikes.

Ali Vaez, Iran Project Director at the International Crisis Group (ICG), told the NYT, "Any solution that cedes control of the strait to Iran would be hard for Trump to swallow, but there is no military solution to eliminate it either," adding, "Trump faces a choice between a war he cannot win and a peace that is unpalatable."

(Photo: AP, Yonhap News)