Iran-U.S. Talks Continue Behind the Scenes as Pressure Mounts Over Strait of Hormuz

While Iran and the United States publicly insist that no negotiations are taking place between them, a series of high-level diplomatic visits to Tehran suggests that efforts to break the deadlock are continuing behind the scenes. Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani arrived in Tehran to discuss what was described as “de-escalation” in the Gulf. His visit followed the arrival of Pakistan’s army chief earlier in the week and a subsequent visit by Oman’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, for extended talks on arrangements governing navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

According to reports, the mediators coordinated their visits and initiatives in advance with the White House and received U.S. backing for efforts aimed at finding a formula acceptable to Washington and Tehran.

The June Memorandum May Still Be Alive

The diplomatic activity suggests that a memorandum of understanding signed in June — which Iran subsequently suspended and President Donald Trump declared “finished” last month — may still provide a framework for ongoing diplomatic efforts.

The discussions between Oman and Iran, for example, reportedly rely on a provision requiring Iran to negotiate with Oman and other Gulf states over navigation arrangements.

The memorandum also included provisions relating to a cessation of attacks against Iran. Although the original 60-day negotiating timetable has expired and the ceasefire has been only partially implemented, Trump has shifted emphasis from military threats toward what Washington describes as an intensified economic campaign against Tehran.

According to reports, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also briefed foreign counterparts on the administration's position.

Strait of Hormuz Emerges as Key Bargaining Chip

No agreement between Oman and Iran has yet been signed. However, reported principles under discussion include the creation of a temporary maritime corridor, the removal of mines and the sharing of revenues generated from navigation-related fees.

Iran is also demanding that only civilian vessels be permitted unrestricted passage through the proposed corridor and that the United States move its forces approximately 400 kilometers away from Iranian territory.

Part of that demand reportedly echoes provisions contained in the June memorandum, under which Washington agreed to move its forces away from the vicinity of Iran within 30 days of a final agreement.

What was initially framed as a security requirement could now become a broader negotiating tool as the Trump administration places greater emphasis on economic pressure and diplomacy rather than immediate military action.

Iran Seeks Compensation for War Damage

Iran is also demanding compensation for damage caused by the war. The June memorandum reportedly included a proposal for the establishment of a $300 billion development fund.

The most difficult issue remains the full removal of sanctions imposed on Iran. Any comprehensive lifting of sanctions is expected to require significant Iranian concessions, particularly regarding its nuclear program.

The Trump administration is attempting to distinguish between older sanctions that could potentially be lifted as part of a nuclear agreement and newly imposed sanctions designed to pressure Tehran back to the negotiating table.

The key unanswered question is what Washington now expects from Iran: a return to negotiations, a preliminary agreement on the Strait of Hormuz, or a comprehensive new deal covering the nuclear issue and other outstanding disputes.

Mediators Prefer to Revive Existing Framework

Western diplomatic sources cited in reports suggest that mediating countries — including Pakistan, Qatar and Turkey — believe there is little value in drafting an entirely new agreement and restarting negotiations from the beginning.

One diplomatic assessment is that an agreement between Iran and Oman on navigation through the Strait of Hormuz could provide Trump with an opportunity to declare a diplomatic achievement.

The larger question would then be how to expand that arrangement into a broader agreement addressing Iran's nuclear program and potentially other issues.

For Tehran, however, the stakes are considerably higher. An agreement governing navigation could effectively provide Iran with greater recognition of its role and sovereignty in the Strait of Hormuz while restoring a crucial route for its oil exports.

That could significantly weaken the effectiveness of the economic pressure campaign against Iran.

Growing Political Divisions Inside Iran

The economic confrontation is also intensifying political divisions inside Iran.

A growing debate has emerged between the more pragmatic camp, associated with President Masoud Pezeshkian and parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, and hardliners associated with the Revolutionary Guard and senior security officials.

Conservative voices have criticized Ghalibaf for signaling a willingness to negotiate with the United States.

Ghalibaf responded that negotiations are neither inherently good nor inherently evil, arguing that their purpose should be to advance Iran's national interests, protect its rights and consolidate the achievements of the resistance.

The dispute reflects a long-standing division within Iran over whether negotiations with Washington represent a necessary strategic tool or an unacceptable concession to pressure.

Economic Crisis Raises the Risk of Renewed Protests

The internal debate is taking place against a deteriorating economic backdrop.

Reports cited in the article describe delays in pension payments, long queues at fuel stations, extremely high unemployment, sharp increases in the prices of basic goods and the closure of thousands of factories.

Parliamentary committees are also considering further austerity measures, including reductions in fuel subsidies and cuts to salaries.

These developments are fueling concern that economic hardship could once again trigger widespread public protests.

Iranian security forces, including the police and Basij, have reportedly increased their presence in Tehran and other areas.

At the same time, the likelihood of a new mass protest movement remains uncertain. Fear of the security services and the trauma of the violent crackdown during previous unrest continue to weigh heavily on Iranian society.

China, Qatar and Pakistan Resist U.S. Sanctions

Despite the intensifying U.S. pressure, Iran continues to have important economic lifelines.

China has rejected the new sanctions, describing unilateral sanctions as contrary to international law and warning that it will take measures to protect its interests if Washington targets Chinese entities economically.

Qatar has also used similar language regarding unilateral sanctions and has recently resumed trade with Iran after several months of disruption.

Pakistan has likewise stated that unilateral sanctions have no basis in international law and indicated that it does not intend to implement them.

Turkey and Azerbaijan, both of which share borders and significant commercial ties with Iran, have yet to make their positions fully clear.

Iraq faces a particularly difficult choice. Bilateral trade with Iran reached approximately $10 billion last year, while Iraq remains dependent on Iranian gas supplies despite having previously faced U.S. sanctions-related pressure.

UAE Faces a Difficult Economic Choice

The United Arab Emirates is currently the only neighboring country reported to have taken significant steps in response to Washington's demands, announcing a freeze on trade and financial transactions with Iran.

However, it remains unclear whether the measures include the approximately 8,000 Iranian companies operating in the UAE, as well as private bank accounts belonging to thousands of Iranian residents.

The UAE faces a significant economic dilemma: Dubai and other parts of the country serve as an important commercial gateway for Iran, with a substantial share of Iran's non-oil trade passing through the Emirates.

A prolonged disruption could cost the UAE billions of dollars while potentially damaging its reputation as a safe and predictable destination for international investors.

Iran Has Learned How to Survive Sanctions

Iran has spent decades developing mechanisms designed to circumvent international sanctions.

The country has established alternative financial and economic networks, decentralized elements of economic management and developed local mechanisms intended to keep essential services and commercial activity functioning despite external pressure.

For decades, international sanctions policy has been based partly on the expectation that economic pressure would eventually force Tehran to make strategic concessions.

But the current confrontation presents a new variable: Iran's leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.

The strategic waterway gives Tehran an economic weapon of its own — one that could potentially disrupt global energy flows and undermine the effectiveness of Washington's sanctions campaign.

For that reason, the diplomatic struggle over the Strait may ultimately prove to be as important as the sanctions themselves.

The Next Battle May Be Diplomatic Rather Than Military

The emerging picture is therefore one of intense diplomatic maneuvering rather than an immediate return to direct U.S.-Iran negotiations.

Qatar, Oman, Pakistan and potentially other regional actors are attempting to bridge the gap between Washington's demands and Tehran's conditions.

The immediate objective appears to be a workable arrangement for navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

But the larger prize is potentially far greater: a framework that could reopen negotiations over Iran's nuclear program, sanctions relief and the broader security architecture of the Gulf.

Whether that process succeeds may depend on which side is ultimately willing to give up more — and how long Iran can withstand the economic pressure without surrendering the strategic leverage provided by the Strait of Hormuz.