Trump’s threats anger Omanis, leave observers puzzled

Trump’s Bombing Threats Against Oman Deepen Gulf Tensions as US-Iran Ceasefire Collapses

Earthguardiansonline.com – The sixty-day window set by a June Memorandum of Understanding for the United States and Iran to reach a comprehensive final deal has now lapsed, leaving both capitals locked in a stalemate over three thorny questions: who controls navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, what happens to billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets, and how Tehran’s nuclear program will be structured going forward. The ceasefire that underpinned those negotiations had already been eroded by repeated violations on both sides. Iran objected to the routing choices made by commercial vessels transiting the strait and moved to target ships that did not follow its preferred corridors. Into this already volatile environment, President Donald Trump injected a fresh layer of alarm by renewing a threat to bomb Oman over its back-channel talks with Tehran.

A Second Warning, Months After the First

On Monday, Trump repeated a warning he had first issued in May, telling Fox News interviewer Trey Yingst that if Oman obstructed American interests, Washington would strike the country. His exact words carried no diplomatic restraint:

“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the shit out of them.”

The remark was not an isolated outburst. In May, Trump had used the phrase “blow up” Oman in connection with the same subject: Muscat’s ongoing negotiations with the Islamic Republic over the future administration and maritime services governing the strait. The irony is difficult to overlook. In a signed document, Trump himself had agreed that Oman would “conduct dialogue” with Tehran precisely to define how the waterway would be managed. The president thus appears to have threatened a country for carrying out a task he had formally authorized.

Oman’s Delicate Position Between the Belligerents

Throughout the war, Muscat positioned itself as a neutral operator. It kept diplomatic channels open with Iran even while Tehran launched large salvos of missiles and drones at neighboring Arab states, occasionally striking Omani territory as well. Ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz — a waterway that physically passes through Omani waters — remained the subject of continuous Omani-Iranian dialogue. As the conflict intensified, Oman permitted vessels to reroute through its own sea lanes, offering an alternative to the corridors precariously designated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Today, Oman is actively negotiating with Tehran on the day-to-day management of the chokepoint, a role that has drawn global attention given Iran’s stated ambitions to seize control of the strait.

Washington’s Own Diplomat Calls the Threats Puzzling

Marc J. Sievers, who served as the United States ambassador to Oman, told CNN that the repeated warnings left him genuinely confused about what motive drove them.

“Perhaps Trump didn’t mean to be taken literally but more the matter of getting the Omani attention, which I’m sure he did.”

He added that it was difficult to imagine Admiral Brad Cooper, the chief of US Central Command, actually planning bombing raids on a small Gulf ally. Sievers acknowledged that the earlier May threats had “upset” Oman, yet he cautioned that Muscat “ought to see risk” in the pattern of repeated warnings.

“This is the second time that President Trump has issued (a) threat. … There is obviously something behind it that you would think the Omanis would want to pay attention to.”

An Independent Policy That Washington Both Needs and Resents

Hasan Alhasan, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, framed the contradiction in blunt terms. He told CNN that Trump’s frustration “broadly stems from the fact that Muscat pursues an independent policy toward Iran that does not always align with US preferences.” He then noted the paradox: that very independence is what allows Oman to serve as a credible mediator, a role Washington frequently depends on to open lines of contact with Tehran. By contrast, Qatar — another Gulf state that has brokered agreements with Iran — coordinated its mediation closely with the American government, a distinction that may sharpen Washington’s irritation with Oman’s autonomy.

It remains unclear how far the Omani-Iranian talks have progressed, or whether Washington has been briefed on their substance. That opacity could itself be feeding the president’s anger toward the Gulf nation.

Silence From Governments, Fire From Social Media

Across Oman and the wider Gulf, official channels stayed quiet. No government issued a formal condemnation or public rebuke of Trump’s language. The Omani Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests for comment. Yet on social media, Omani commentators were far less restrained.

Zakaria Al-Muharrmi, writing on X, reminded readers of Oman’s past diplomatic services to Washington:

“America’s wise leaders know that Oman is the one that freed many detained American citizens in Tehran, and that it is the one that convinced the Houthis to stop shelling American warships, and that it is the key to the solution in the Strait of Hormuz crisis.”

He went on to suggest that Trump’s “rude language” might prompt Oman to freeze its efforts to help Republicans avoid “rising fuel bills” and an “anticipated loss in the midterm elections.”

Abdullah Adawi, another Omani commentator, argued that Trump had chosen “escalation and threats” against a US ally specifically because Oman had “stuck to its position and its independent decision.” From neighboring United Arab Emirates, political scientist Abdulkhaleq Abdullah called the threats “completely rejected” and insisted they must be condemned by Gulf Arab states in the “strongest terms.”

What the Expired Agreement Leaves Behind

With the June memorandum now past its sixty-day deadline, both Washington and Tehran face a renewed impasse. The strait’s management, the disposition of frozen Iranian funds, and the architecture of Tehran’s nuclear program all remain unresolved. For Oman, the stakes are personal: its territorial waters form part of the very waterway at the center of the dispute, and its continued role as mediator depends on being perceived as neither a US instrument nor an Iranian ally. Trump’s latest threats, however blunt, risk undermining the fragile neutrality that has kept the strait open and the talks alive.