Nournews: Despite previously announced arrangements and preparations, Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi announced in the final hours that a meeting of foreign ministers of the Persian Gulf littoral states, whose main focus was to reach an agreement on navigation and shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, had been postponed.

At the same time, Mohammad Ali Bak, director general of the Persian Gulf Department at Iran’s Foreign Ministry, said the meeting scheduled for Monday had been postponed to another date at the request of some regional countries and following a joint decision by Oman and Iran.

Iran’s acceptance of the postponement, despite having the option to insist on holding the meeting as scheduled, is a clear sign of Tehran’s goodwill and sincerity in pursuing regional convergence. That sincerity now puts the littoral states of the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman before a serious test: Can they demonstrate in practice their political independence and their stated commitment to establishing a homegrown security framework?

Patience Should Not Be Mistaken for Weakness

Iran has consistently emphasized the principle of regional convergence and the resolution of disputes through intra-regional dialogue. President Masoud Pezeshkian’s recent meeting with the UAE Crown Prince on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in India, despite some hostile actions by the UAE toward Iran, was an example of this approach. The meeting underscored the need to strengthen relations among neighboring countries.

Even during the six-month Ramadan war, Iran’s region-focused diplomacy did not come to a halt, and diplomatic consultations continued, with mediators from Oman, Pakistan and Qatar traveling to Tehran. Today, too, Iran’s acceptance of the postponement of the meeting is part of the same dialogue-oriented policy—a policy that reflects not weakness, but confidence in Iran’s national capabilities and in the link between the battlefield and diplomacy.

Any interpretation of this approach as a retreat or a sign of weakness would be a serious miscalculation. While welcoming dialogue, Iran has not altered its fundamental principles for safeguarding its security and national interests. Regional countries should likewise view this strategic patience as an opportunity to build trust and open channels for dialogue, rather than as an opportunity to test Iran’s resolve.

Hormuz: A Matter to Be Addressed Within the Legal Framework of Iran and Oman

One point that regional and extraregional countries should take into account is the geographical and legal position of Iran and Oman as the two countries bordering the Strait of Hormuz. Accordingly, any arrangements concerning the waterway should be pursued within the framework of the rights and agreements of these two countries.

The invitation extended to other regional countries to attend the Oman meeting should also be viewed in this context. It is an effort to share information, build mutual understanding and clarify the responsibilities of regional and extra-regional countries regarding maritime security and navigation.

From this perspective, the concerns raised by countries such as Bahrain and Saudi Arabia cannot alter the fundamental understanding between Iran and Oman. Rather, they primarily reflect those countries’ own positions. This is particularly significant given that the conduct of some Arab states during the 12-day war and the Ramadan war has raised serious questions about their commitment to good-neighborly relations and goodwill.

Iran, too, has the right to pursue arrangements it deems necessary to safeguard its own security and that of the region, in accordance with prevailing circumstances and within the framework of international law.

The Oman Meeting: A Litmus Test for Genuine Independence

The Oman meeting could serve as a practical test for countries that speak of political independence and the need to localize regional security. It is not possible to speak of homegrown security while, at critical moments, tying security and military decisions to the will of extra-regional powers.

Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan’s emphasis on the importance of stability in shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and other waterways, and its direct connection to energy security and international trade flows, could, if translated into concrete action, represent a positive step toward establishing a regional security framework based on local capabilities.

But the gap between rhetoric and action can only be bridged through independent decisions. Attending the Oman meeting without imposing conditions originating outside its agenda could be one of the first signs of such independence.

At the same time, linking the issue of the Strait of Hormuz to developments in Yemen is neither logical nor constructive. What is happening in Yemen is, first and foremost, a matter of the will and interests of the Yemeni people. Iran, just as it does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, follows the same approach toward Yemen.

The Yemeni resistance cannot be explained simply by labeling it as a “proxy” force; it is rooted in the Yemeni people’s choice and determination to achieve independence and freedom.

Hormuz Will Not Be Kept Open Through Pressure; It Will Remain Open Once Iran’s Conditions Are Met

A recent report by the Hebrew-language Israel Hayom, which is close to the Likud party, about Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s alleged request for regional and indirect assistance from the Israeli regime in confronting Ansarullah, if accurate, raises serious questions about Riyadh’s claims regarding the unity of the Muslim world.

Turning the Oman meeting into a platform for putting pressure on Yemen or concealing such contradictions, however, cannot offer a solution.

The United States and some Arab countries should also abandon the assumption that derailing the Oman meeting can change realities on the ground or force Iran to retreat. The Strait of Hormuz, whether or not an agreement is signed, will remain open only within the framework of Iran’s conditions and considerations concerning security and national interests.

Therefore, staying away from the meeting or playing into Washington’s hands would not resolve the Hormuz issue; rather, it could further complicate navigation and security in the waterway.

Holding the Oman meeting, by contrast, would provide an opportunity to build trust, strengthen homegrown regional security, make amends for some past misguided actions and create the conditions for improving navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

If that opportunity is lost, responsibility for its consequences will rest with those who chose a path of pressure and dependency instead of regional dialogue.