Iran Awaits Trump Response on Seven-Day Hormuz Plan

Published: 25 September 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

Iran is waiting for a response from US President Donald Trump to a proposal that could reopen the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz within seven days and bring Washington and Tehran back into direct negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme. The proposal, presented through mediators, links the reopening of the major shipping route to a series of conditions that include the lifting of US sanctions on Iranian oil exports, an end to military hostilities across the region and the release of some frozen Iranian assets.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the proposal was designed to accelerate commitments previously discussed between the two countries and create a practical sequence for reducing tensions. Under the plan, Iran would open the strait within six or seven days after the necessary conditions were met, while formal discussions on its nuclear programme could begin the following day.

The proposal places the Strait of Hormuz at the centre of a wider diplomatic effort to bring the current conflict closer to an end. The waterway, situated between Iran and Oman, is one of the world’s most important energy routes, carrying a substantial share of internationally traded oil and gas. Any prolonged disruption has the potential to affect energy prices, shipping costs and supply chains far beyond the Middle East.

Araghchi said Iran had already reached an understanding with Oman concerning a temporary arrangement for maritime traffic through the strait. Tehran has described the proposed arrangement as effectively agreed and indicated that the technical details could be formally registered with the International Maritime Organization.

The Iranian foreign minister said he was now waiting for Washington to respond. He also said Iran had consulted China about the proposal and that Beijing had expressed support for the initiative.

The timing of the proposal is significant because diplomatic contacts between Iran and the United States have intensified around the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Iranian and American officials have held discussions through intermediaries, while regional governments have continued trying to find a way to prevent the conflict from spreading further.

Araghchi said the conditions attached to the proposal were not new demands but were linked to commitments previously included in a memorandum of understanding reached between Iran and the United States in June. Tehran’s latest initiative would, however, bring forward the timetable for nuclear negotiations. Instead of waiting for the longer period originally envisaged, Iran is proposing that discussions begin almost immediately after the reopening of the waterway.

For Iran, the issue of sanctions remains central. Tehran wants restrictions on its oil exports removed as part of any arrangement, arguing that an agreement cannot be sustainable if economic pressure remains in place while the country is expected to make concessions on maritime access and nuclear negotiations.

The Iranian proposal also extends beyond the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran wants the broader war to end on all fronts, including the conflict involving Israel and Lebanon. That condition creates a major diplomatic challenge because Washington would have to consider how such an arrangement could affect its regional partners and ongoing military commitments.

Another issue concerns Iranian assets frozen under sanctions. Tehran is seeking the release of some of those funds as part of the proposed process. For Iran, access to frozen assets would provide an economic benefit at a time when sanctions and conflict have placed additional pressure on its economy.

The situation is further complicated by developments in Yemen. Iran-backed Houthi forces have been involved in renewed fighting with Saudi Arabia, while attacks and threats around the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandab have created another layer of uncertainty for international shipping.

Saudi Arabia had previously been expected to support an Oman-Iran arrangement concerning the Strait of Hormuz, but its position became more difficult as fighting involving the Houthis intensified. Riyadh has expressed serious concerns over attacks attributed to the Iran-backed group and the potential impact on Saudi territory and energy infrastructure.

Iran has said it has urged the Houthis to stop attacks on Saudi Arabia. At the same time, Iranian officials have maintained that Tehran does not exercise complete control over the group’s decisions. The distinction is important because Saudi Arabia’s position could influence the prospects for any regional agreement concerning the movement of ships through Hormuz.

The situation also carries a wider security dimension. Iranian military officials have warned that any further US escalation could lead to additional pressure on maritime routes, including the Bab al-Mandab Strait. Such warnings underline the possibility that the conflict could affect more than one major international shipping corridor.

The economic consequences are already being closely watched. Oil prices have remained elevated amid uncertainty over supplies and shipping security. Any credible agreement that allows traffic through Hormuz to resume could ease some of the pressure on energy markets, although the broader impact would depend on whether the arrangement proves durable and whether other regional conflicts also subside.

The Strait of Hormuz is particularly important because alternative export routes cannot easily replace its capacity. Gulf producers have explored pipelines and other maritime routes to reduce their dependence on the waterway, but regional insecurity has complicated those efforts. Disruptions around the Red Sea have also demonstrated how quickly attacks on shipping routes can affect energy markets and international trade.

The diplomatic process is therefore being closely monitored not only in Washington and Tehran but also in Gulf capitals and other major economies. A reopening of Hormuz could provide immediate relief for shipping and energy markets, while a broader agreement could potentially reduce the risk of further military escalation.

Britain has also entered the diplomatic discussions. UK Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband met Araghchi in New York, marking the first meeting between British and Iranian foreign ministers in about a year. Relations between London and Tehran have remained strained, including after Britain designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organisation.

During the meeting, Miliband reportedly stressed Britain’s support for freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz and expressed support for a diplomatic solution. He also raised British concerns about Iran’s activities in the United Kingdom and called for consular access to British nationals imprisoned in Iran.

The British position reflects the wider international concern over the safety of commercial shipping. Freedom of navigation through Hormuz has become one of the central questions surrounding the current crisis, with governments seeking guarantees that commercial vessels can continue operating without being drawn into military confrontations.

Meanwhile, the United States faces its own difficult calculations. Washington would have to determine whether Iran’s proposed conditions provide sufficient guarantees for a lasting arrangement. The question of who would control and regulate maritime traffic through the strait could become particularly sensitive.

Iran wants to maintain a degree of control over shipping through the waterway, including restrictions on certain military movements. The United States and its regional partners may have concerns about accepting arrangements that could give Tehran significant authority over an international maritime route.

Questions about navigation fees, tolls and other technical arrangements have also yet to be fully resolved. These issues could potentially be addressed later if the broader diplomatic framework succeeds, but they could become obstacles if the parties fail to agree on the practical details of implementation.

Araghchi has indicated that Iran is prepared to wait for Washington’s answer. He has also suggested that Tehran does not want to rush the process, despite the importance it attaches to reopening the strait and beginning nuclear negotiations.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has simultaneously sought to present Tehran’s position as one that combines resistance to military pressure with an openness to diplomacy. His recent appearance at the United Nations reflected that approach, as he rejected what Iran considers unacceptable pressure while signalling that negotiations remain possible.

The United States, meanwhile, must weigh the diplomatic opportunity against concerns about sanctions enforcement, regional security and its commitments to allies. Any agreement would also have to address the conflicts involving Israel, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, making the negotiations substantially broader than a simple arrangement over maritime traffic.

For global markets, the immediate question is whether the proposal can translate into a verifiable reopening of Hormuz. For diplomats, the larger issue is whether the seven-day framework can establish enough confidence between Washington and Tehran to move from crisis management towards sustained negotiations.

The coming days could therefore prove important. If Washington accepts the proposal or moves towards negotiations on its conditions, the Strait of Hormuz could become the starting point for a wider diplomatic process. If the two sides remain divided over sanctions, military operations and regional security, the waterway is likely to remain at the centre of the confrontation.

For now, Tehran says the proposal is on the table and that it is waiting for the American response. Whether the initiative becomes a practical agreement will depend on the ability of Iran, the United States and their regional partners to resolve the substantial political, military and economic differences that continue to separate them.