Speaking at a televised interview on Tuesday night, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs Kazem Gharibabadi explained the details of recent understandings between Iran and Oman concerning the Strait of Hormuz.

Regarding the understanding with Oman, Gharibabadi said Iran and Oman are the only two littoral states of the Strait of Hormuz. He noted that Iran had not faced problems in the waterway before the recent wars imposed by the US and the Zionist regime and had not placed particular emphasis on the issue. However, he said the 40-day war has changed the situation and Iran remains in a state of war.

He said Iran has explained to Oman and mediators that Tehran is entitled to establish and enforce certain regulations concerning the Strait of Hormuz.

The deputy foreign minister said Iran has no objection to reaching an understanding with Oman on the issue, which is also referenced in the Islamabad memorandum of understanding. He explained that Oman would be consulted on the long-term management of the Strait of Hormuz, while Iran’s concerns and security considerations would have to be taken into account.

According to Gharibabadi, Iran has held negotiations with Oman over the past 45 days to establish a route for the passage of commercial vessels.

He described the US establishment of an “illegal southern route” as an obvious violation of Washington’s commitments. Although the US has accused Iran of violating the agreement, he rejected the claim as baseless.

Gharibabadi said the Islamabad MoU clearly stipulates that the Strait would be reopened during the first 30 days under Iran’s management and discretion. He added that the southern route constitutes a violation of the MoU and that the US has refused to close it.

He said Iran has subsequently discussed the issue with Oman, warning that the southern route could increase tensions and lead to the outbreak of conflict in the region. Iran had expected Oman’s assistance in closing the route, he added, but intense US pressure prevented that from happening, after which military confrontations occurred.

Gharibabadi said Iran then moved to close the Strait of Hormuz, which put pressure on the other side. He described the developments that have now taken place as largely similar to the requests Iran had made before the negotiations, saying Tehran’s measures proved effective and prompted the other side to cooperate under the new circumstances. He said this could be interpreted as a retreat from their previous positions.

Gharibabadi said commercial vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz had been conducted entirely from the Omani side since 1968, adding that Iran had suffered serious damage as a result.

He argued that Iran has the right to counter threats and harm directed against it and stressed that the Strait of Hormuz has now become a national security issue for Iran. He said Iran faces numerous adversaries and therefore needs to strengthen its defense capabilities, noting that ships had passed through the Omani side for 58 years.

Iran had proposed fundamental changes to maritime traffic arrangements in light of the new circumstances, the deputy minster noted, stressing that the understanding with Oman did not mean that the Strait of Hormuz would automatically reopen the following day.

Rather, he explained, the understanding concerns the establishment of a new route in which vessels entering the Persian Gulf would use a route through Iranian waters, while vessels exiting would initially use Omani territorial waters before continuing through Iranian waters.

He compared the arrangement to a corridor approximately seven nautical miles long, explaining that it would not consist of separate lanes at the northern and southern ends of the Strait but would function more like a two-way highway.

Gharibabadi said the current route would be temporary. He explained that Iran and Oman have had a permanent maritime traffic scheme, but Iran had proposed changing it and establishing a new permanent route.

If the temporary route is agreed upon, he said, Iran and Oman would have between 30 and 60 days to negotiate a permanent route that would replace it.

He further explained that the negotiations are being conducted through a joint working group comprising the Foreign Ministry, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), the General Staff of the Armed Forces and naval forces.

The maps discussed with Oman, he said, had been provided by Iran’s Armed Forces, stressing that the issue concerns technical routing and therefore does not fall within the Foreign Ministry’s authority. He said the Armed Forces are responsible for the matter and are carrying out their duties properly.

Gharibabadi emphasized that the understandings did not amount to a reopening of the Strait, explaining that the framework must be understood clearly.

He said a key point is that the Strait remains closed, despite US claims that it is open. Such claims, he said, should not be considered credible because the Strait remains under the supervision and control of Iran’s Armed Forces.

The waterway, he stressed, will not reopen unless the arrangements, considerations and conditions set by Iran are accepted. He added that Iran has made its position clear and does not seek confrontation with the countries of the world, but expects others to understand that Iran was subjected to military aggression and is acting to protect its security.

Gharibabadi said the southern route would be closed as the first step, adding that this was part of the agreement. Under the understanding, he said, Oman accepts the closure of the southern route and the decision will be communicated to the International Maritime Organization.

The second outcome of the understanding, he said, would be the launch of Iran-Oman negotiations on the future administration of the Strait of Hormuz. These talks could continue for up to 60 days to establish joint arrangements.

He warned that the Strait would remain closed if Iran’s requirements were not met.

The third outcome, he added, would be the launch of negotiations between Iran and Oman on a new maritime traffic scheme.

Gharibabadi noted that this was the first time Iran and Oman had discussed security concerns as part of their understandings, emphasizing that the current circumstances are exceptional and cannot be considered normal.

He also stressed that no military vessel would be permitted to transit the Strait of Hormuz, adding that the understanding applies only to commercial vessels.

Addressing Iran’s conditions for reopening the Strait, Gharibabadi said the issue could not be reduced to the lifting of the blockade alone.

He said Iran had not been under blockade when it closed the Strait, arguing that the US had introduced a new card by imposing a blockade. He rejected the idea that Iran should give up its leverage over the Strait in exchange for lifting a blockade, describing such an arrangement as unequal.

Gharibabadi said the US must fulfill its commitments under the understandings, outlining Iran’s conditions as the complete lifting of the economic blockade, a lasting end to the war on all fronts, including Lebanon, and clarification of the status of the blockade of Yemen.

He added that Washington is also committed to refraining from threatening Iran and from launching further military operations against the country.

Gharibabadi said the Strait could be reopened once these conditions are fulfilled and Iran becomes convinced that the US has regretted its actions. At the same time, he stressed that Iran has no trust in the US.

The deputy foreign minister stressed that the first priority is implementation of the commitments under the Islamabad MoU. He said the other side must meet its obligations and demonstrate this clearly to Iran.

Describing the US as Iran’s major adversary, Gharibabadi warned against underestimating Washington.

He said that if the US is preparing any other scenario, it should understand that Iran is fully prepared for any scenario.

He concluded that military and security strategies are now under consideration and that Iran could, like its adversaries, resort to preemptive measures.