Oman likely to ...
Page 1
Even regarding the proposal raised by Iran that Tehran and Muscat jointly collect transit fees, Oman sought to preserve its neutrality. That is why the threats issued by US officials were largely meaningless, since Oman was not actively pursuing such a course of action. The two countries were still engaged in negotiations, and no agreement had been reached.
At the same time, Oman has every legitimate right to reach agreements and understandings with its northern neighbor. Furthermore, the entire Persian Gulf sits on a continental shelf. From the perspective of international law, these waters are not considered international waters but rather part of the continental shelf shared by Iran and Oman.
The fact that Iran and Oman have not collected transit fees in previous years, or have not restricted the passage of foreign vessels, does not mean they lack legal rights. International law grants both countries the right to reach an agreement on a specific legal regime governing this strait, which is shared exclusively by Iran and Oman.
The statements made by US officials are inconsistent with international law. Unfortunately, however, it increasingly appears that international law itself has little practical standing today.
It should be emphasized that Oman had neither endorsed nor rejected the issue of collecting transit fees. Iran merely raised the proposal, and Oman listened to it. If the United States believes such threats can alter Oman's position or force it to change its relationship with Iran, that seems unlikely.
Oman has adopted a policy of friendship and neutrality and remains deeply committed to it. It is expected to continue pursuing this approach of maintaining friendly relations with all parties while preserving its neutral stance.
In the long term, how could such an approach affect Oman’s level of trust in the United States?
Well, much of the world today has become distrustful of Washington, including Oman. Even America's European allies have become increasingly skeptical.
During the illegal war launched by the United States and Israel against Iran, Trump appealed to European countries to participate. However, hostility toward Trump in the international arena had become so widespread that they declined to do so.
The remarks directed at Oman—a country widely viewed as neutral and peace-oriented—will only intensify resentment toward both the United States and Trump. Even if regional countries do not openly support Oman, they are likely to sympathize with it privately in this matter.
What message do these threats send to other Arab states along the Persian Gulf that maintain close ties with the United States? Could this approach raise doubts about Washington’s respect for the decision-making independence of its regional partners and encourage them to diversify their security and political relationships?
The first question is whether these countries genuinely possess independent sovereignty.
In practice, they appear to have little autonomy or independent political will. If they did possess such will, they would be expected to respond appropriately. Instead, they remain silent, hearing these threats and insults without reacting.
If these countries have the necessary determination, they should move toward diversifying their foreign relations and reducing their dependence on the United States.
The real question, however, is whether such a determination exists. Whether they are prepared to act in the interests of their countries and their peoples remains open to doubt.