Nournews: The Wall Street Journal’s latest report on Washington’s concerns over Iran-Oman talks regarding the Strait of Hormuz now confirms an important part of a report Nournews previously published about the purpose of the confidential June 17 meeting in Manama.

The Wall Street Journal says U.S. officials are concerned that an agreement between Tehran and Muscat could consolidate Iran’s role and control over the Strait of Hormuz. This is the same concern that, according to informed sources, was at the center of discussions among American, Emirati and Israeli officials in Manama.

According to the Nournews report, the June 17 meeting was attended by Mohammed bin Zayed, CENTCOM Commander Brad Cooper, and a senior Mossad adviser, while Marco Rubio also participated remotely. The meeting took place just one day before the Iran-U.S. understanding was signed on June 18. According to informed Bahraini sources, its main focus was examining the implications of the understanding and preventing the consolidation of its outcomes, particularly in the Strait of Hormuz.

Perhaps the most significant part of the Manama account was a remark attributed to Mohammed bin Zayed: “Be careful not to create another Oman in the region.”

At the time, the remark primarily reflected concern over Oman’s role as an independent mediator between Tehran and Washington. Today, however, its meaning has become clearer, as Oman has emerged as one of the key players in negotiations over Hormuz, while Washington has also expressed concern about the outcome of those talks.

The Wall Street Journal has reported that Iran-Oman negotiations on managing shipping in the Strait of Hormuz are making progress and could ease pressure on energy markets. However, U.S. officials are concerned that such an agreement could consolidate Iran’s control over the strait. The newspaper also reported that Trump wants an agreement that would fully reopen Hormuz and leave Tehran with less control over commercial traffic.

The report casts the Manama meeting in a new light. The concern raised at that meeting was reportedly to prevent the emergence of arrangements that would consolidate Iran’s position in Hormuz and strengthen Oman’s role as a mediator. The Wall Street Journal’s latest report indicates that the same issue has now become an openly stated concern among U.S. officials.

From this perspective, the issue was not simply whether Hormuz would be open or closed. The central question was who would set the rules governing security and passage through the waterway once it was reopened. The June 18 understanding, followed by a possible Iran-Oman agreement, could create a scenario in which Iran would gain greater weight in Hormuz’s security arrangements, while Oman would assume a more prominent role as an independent channel of communication between Tehran and the West.

Against this backdrop, Trump’s recent threat against Oman also takes on greater significance. Trump has warned that if Oman gets in the way of a U.S. agreement with Iran or Washington’s actions concerning Hormuz, the United States could target the country with bombing. The Wall Street Journal has also linked the threat to Oman’s role in the Iran talks and efforts to manage shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

Four developments can therefore now be meaningfully connected: the confidential June 17 meeting in Manama, the June 18 Iran-U.S. understanding, Iran-Oman negotiations over Hormuz, and Washington’s publicly expressed concern about the consolidation of Iran’s role in the strait.

The Wall Street Journal report significantly overlaps with the most important strategic point raised in the Nournews report: concern over the consolidation of Iran’s role in Hormuz and the implications of Oman’s growing role.

For this reason, bin Zayed’s remark may now be easier to understand: “Be careful not to create another Oman in the region.” The concern was not simply about the emergence of another mediator. It was about the formation of a process that, following the understanding, could create a new order in Hormuz — one in which Iran would have greater weight while Oman would remain an independent channel of communication between Tehran and the West.