WANA (May 28) – The Strait of Hormuz dossier went through a remarkable trajectory during the Ramadan War and the subsequent negotiations — one that offers a clearer picture of the dimensions of the agreement currently under discussion:

 

  1. The war began on March 1 with a joint U.S.-Israeli attack that resulted in the assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader and a number of the country’s senior military commanders.
  2. In response to the attack, and in line with the strategy announced by the slain leader, Iran’s armed forces placed U.S. interests across the region within the range of their missiles and drones.
  3. As the regional confrontation expanded, the Islamic Republic closed the Strait of Hormuz and effectively took control of one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints.
  4. After 40 days of war, Iran conditionally accepted a ceasefire on April 7.
  5. As previously announced, the Islamabad peace negotiations began with the participation of the Iranian negotiating team, but concluded on April 12 without a clear outcome.
  6. On April 13, the United States announced that it had imposed a naval blockade on Iran by deploying its fleet in the Gulf of Oman and taking control of the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz.
  7. Efforts by the negotiating team to preserve the ceasefire and maintain hopes for a successful diplomatic process led to the absence of any direct move to break the blockade or challenge the maritime restrictions on Iran. In practice, this gave Washington a new bargaining chip at the negotiating table.
  8. Exchanges of messages and diplomatic contacts between Iran and the United States, facilitated by intermediary countries, have continued ever since.
  9. In recent days, according to Western media reports, a final agreement to formally end the war between Iran and the United States appears to be approaching its concluding stages.
  10. Unconfirmed reports now suggest that the draft agreement includes clauses related to lifting the naval blockade in exchange for Iran’s full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

 

In effect, the United States imposed a blockade on Iran after the ceasefire took hold, while Tehran refrained from breaking that blockade in order to preserve the ceasefire itself. Over time, the blockade evolved into a strategic bargaining tool for Washington, used to counterbalance Iran’s leverage through the Strait of Hormuz.

 

The Iranian negotiating team is now reportedly weighing whether the strategic advantage emphasized by the leadership — namely control over the Strait of Hormuz gained through the war — should be traded for the lifting of the naval blockade, which itself became a U.S. advantage derived from the ceasefire, or instead preserved as a tool for consolidating Iran’s postwar gains.