A possible agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz has exposed a deeper question inside Iran: who has the authority to make decisions during a crisis that has pushed power away from formal political institutions and toward the security establishment.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Tuesday that a deal to reopen the strait could come within a day or two. Tehran, on the other hand, has denied holding any talks with the United States. Iran is not negotiating with the US at all, its Foreign Ministry insists, but with Oman, over a temporary safe route through the waterway. Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Wednesday that the route under discussion would have no bearing on whether the strait reopens.
Both accounts may be accurate. What Washington is describing as a negotiation with Iran, Tehran is describing as a technical arrangement with a neighbor. The distinction is politically useful at home but carries costs abroad, giving Washington an opening to accuse Iranian officials of asking for talks and then disowning them. The question, then, is what Tehran gets in return.
The value for Tehran is the category itself. A maritime arrangement with Oman is a different kind of decision than a negotiation with the US, and in Iran the distinction matters because it determines which institutions are entitled to be involved.
Why the label matters
AL-MONITOR All-Access gives you unlimited access to all our journalism, the full Daily Briefing, exclusive interviews, premium newsletters, and live events — for less than $2/week.
