A tanker reported being struck by a projectile in the Strait ​of Hormuz on Saturday, Britain’s maritime security agency said, after the United States and Iran each launched strikes in the worst escalation since they signed an interim peace deal.

The warring sides ‌each accused the other of violating the agreement reached two weeks ago to end the four-month-old conflict. Washington said it hit Iranian targets overnight, while Iran said it had struck targets linked to US forces on Saturday in response.

Saturday’s attack on a tanker in the strait followed another on a cargo ship on Thursday that triggered the latest escalation.

Iran has made a fresh bid to assert control over the world’s most important energy shipping route, which has begun to reopen over the past two weeks after months of ​disruption.

Britain’s UKMTO maritime security agency said the tanker hit on Saturday had sustained damage to its bridge, with all crew reported safe. The Joint Maritime Information Centre, run by a coalition of navies protecting ​shipping, said it had raised its security threat level as a result of recent incidents.

Iran has not directly commented on reports of specific attacks on ships. But ⁠Iranian state television reported that the Revolutionary Guards had fired “warning shots” towards unspecified vessels attempting to pass through channels not approved by Iran, and that this was now prompting other ships to seek Iranian permits before attempting ​to cross the strait.

Earlier, Iran’s foreign ministry said it had launched “defensive” attacks on US-linked military targets, while Bahrain, which hosts the US Navy’s regional headquarters, reported an Iranian drone attack. The US military did not immediately respond ​to the reports.

IRAN ASSERTS CONTROL OVER VITAL STRAIT

Iran has accused the United States of failing to uphold the interim agreement, in particular by failing to sustain a promised ceasefire in Lebanon, which U.S. ally Israel invaded in March in pursuit of the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah.

Israel and Lebanon have repeatedly agreed US-brokered ceasefires, the latest of which was announced on Friday. But these have so far had only limited overall impact, with Israel insisting it will not withdraw from a swathe of territory it has seized and ​Hezbollah repeatedly rejecting calls to give up its arms as long as Israeli troops remain in place.

Lebanese state television reported an Israeli drone strike on Saturday in the Nabatiyeh area in the south, which has seen ​Israeli strikes throughout the conflict. The Israeli military said it had targeted a person who posed a threat to its forces.

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem rejected the day-old Israel-Lebanon agreement as surrender, and said it was “null and void”.

Mohsen Rezaei, an adviser to Iran’s ‌supreme leader, said ⁠Washington had violated the war-ending memorandum of understanding by supporting what he called proxy forces in the region and creating tensions in the Strait of Hormuz.

Throughout the war, Iran has responded to US attacks by hitting neighbouring Gulf states that host large US military bases.

Iranian state television said the Revolutionary Guards had delivered “a decisive response” after US forces hit a communications tower in the port city of Sirik.

Iran’s Mehr news agency said the Iranian port was operating normally with no damage reported to facilities or equipment.

Bahrain said Iran’s latest attacks violated the memorandum of understanding.

Hundreds of ships, including tankers laden with oil, have been blockaded inside the Gulf since war broke ​out. As they began leaving through the strait over ​the past two weeks, oil prices have tumbled ⁠close to pre-war levels on the resulting surge in supply.

But fully resolving the global energy crisis would require sustaining two-way traffic through the strait at pre-war levels, likely to be possible only if shippers accept it as safe.

Washington has been promoting a southern lane along the coast of Oman, while Tehran, which ultimately aims to charge ​fees for use of the strait, wants ships to use a northern route through its waters and under its control.

Ebrahim Azizi, head of the Iranian parliament’s national ​security committee, said on Saturday ⁠that any violation of Iran’s shipping instructions would be met decisively.

‘VIOLENCE WILL BE MET WITH VIOLENCE,’ VANCE SAYS

US Vice President JD Vance, President Donald Trump’s chief negotiator on the conflict, said the Americans had adhered to the ceasefire deal, and Iran was to blame for any return to conflict that might result from its actions.

“Iran signed a ceasefire agreement. We have honoured it. If they have disagreements about how the MOU is being applied, they can pick up the phone. ⁠But violence will ​be met with violence,” Vance said on X.

As has regularly been the case throughout the war, the escalation unfolded over the weekend ​while markets were closed, giving the sides two days to stake out tough positions and exchange fire without causing any immediate oil price impact.

Previously, including the last two weekends, bitter words on Friday and Saturday were followed by more ameliorative positions from both sides in time ​for markets to reopen on Monday.

Before the renewed outbreak of violence, oil prices fell about 3% on Friday, on course for a steep weekly fall.

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem rejected a US-brokered security agreement between Lebanon and Israel on ​Saturday, a day after it was signed, describing it as a ‌surrender to Israel.

In the latest example of ongoing hostilities despite repeated ceasefires and agreements, Israel launched a drone strike in Lebanon’s south.

More than a million Lebanese have been driven from their homes ​by a conflict that has run in parallel with the wider Iran ​war. Hezbollah and Iran say Washington pledged to end hostilities in ⁠Lebanon as part of its memorandum of understanding signed two weeks ago to end ​the wider war.

The framework agreed on Friday provides for a phased Israeli withdrawal from ​some parts of southern Lebanon, alongside the deployment of the Lebanese army. But Israeli forces would be permitted to remain in an expanded security zone for the time being, pending further implementation.

In ​a statement, Qassem called it “null and void”, and accused the Lebanese government of ​making unilateral concessions and undermining Lebanon’s sovereignty.

He criticised provisions linking Israel’s withdrawal to Hezbollah’s disarmament, saying ‌they effectively ⁠legitimised Israel’s military presence and crossed “all red lines”.

The group would continue its armed resistance, he added: “We did not leave the battlefield in the most difficult circumstances, and we will not leave it.”

Lebanon’s state news agency said an Israeli drone struck Nabatieh ​al-Fawqa on Saturday.

The ​area is outside ⁠the security zone shown on a map published by Israel of the territory its troops will continue to control.

The Israeli military ​told Reuters it had carried out the strike, using a ​drone because ⁠it had no troops in the immediate area. It said it targeted an individual who posed a threat to its forces, without giving further details or evidence.

Qassem said the ⁠Iran-US memorandum of ​understanding reached earlier this month, which guarantees Lebanon’s ​territorial integrity, should serve as the basis for ending the conflict, rather than Friday’s Washington agreement.

Iran launched a drone attack targeting Bahrain on Saturday, while a commercial vessel in the Strait of Hormuz separately came under attack, in what appeared to be Tehran’s response to overnight US air strikes on Iranian targets.

The latest incidents have raised fears of a renewed escalation in the Gulf, despite ongoing efforts by Iran and the United States to negotiate a broader agreement aimed at ending months of conflict.

According to Bahraini authorities, several Iranian drones targeted the kingdom, which hosts the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet and has been among the strongest regional critics of Tehran.

In a statement, Bahrain’s Foreign Ministry condemned the attack as “a flagrant threat to the security of citizens and residents,” saying a number of Iranian drones had been directed at the country.

Earlier on Saturday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it had targeted several positions belonging to what it described as the “US terrorist army” across the region.

The statement, carried by Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency, did not specify the locations targeted.

The attacks came after the United States launched fresh air strikes on Iranian targets on Friday night, saying the action was in response to an Iranian drone strike on a commercial vessel attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday.

Separately, Britain’s United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) agency reported that a tanker had come under attack in the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday.

The agency said the vessel’s crew was safe and that no environmental damage had been reported.

No group immediately claimed responsibility for the attack on the tanker, although suspicion quickly fell on Iran amid escalating hostilities in the region.

The latest exchanges have heightened concerns that the conflict could spiral further despite an interim agreement reached earlier between Tehran and Washington aimed at paving the way for a more comprehensive peace settlement.

Iranian authorities on Saturday said that no damage was sustained at the port of Sirik following US strikes on Iranian targets, despite reports of explosions in the area.

According to Iran’s semi-official Mehr news agency, the head of ports in eastern Hormozgan province said the port of Sirik remained fully operational and that no damage had been inflicted on its facilities or equipment.

The statement came after the United States launched fresh attacks on Iranian targets in response to an incident a day earlier in which a commercial cargo vessel was allegedly struck by an Iranian drone.

Mehr reported that explosions had been heard within the port premises earlier, but officials later confirmed that operations at the facility were continuing normally and that no infrastructure had been affected.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said that in response to US strikes, its navy “struck the locations where the terrorist US military is stationed in the region”. 

The ceasefire agreement gives Iran control over ship traffic in the strait, the Guards said.

“However, the United States, by provoking various fronts, sought to violate this commitment, and the necessary response was given and will continue to be given. If the aggression is repeated, our response will be broader than this,” the Revolutionary Guards said.

Pakistan and Iran have reaffirmed their commitment to promoting lasting peace and stability in the region and beyond during a telephone call between their top diplomats.

According to a Foreign Office statement, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Senator Ishaq Dar held a telephone conversation with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Dar reaffirmed Islamabad’s commitment to playing a constructive role in promoting lasting peace and stability.

On the occasion, Araghchi expressed appreciation for Pakistan’s support for peace efforts and thanked Islamabad for its assistance in ensuring the safe and smooth return of Iranian crew members and fishermen to their home country.

Both leaders agreed to remain in contact to advance diplomatic efforts for peace and regional stability.

The two foreign ministers agreed to remain in close contact as diplomatic efforts aimed at easing regional tensions continue.

The conversation came hours after the United States announced that its forces had carried out strikes on Iranian missile, drone and radar installations, accusing Tehran of involvement in an attack on a commercial vessel transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

In response, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said its naval forces had targeted US military positions across the region following American strikes on southern Iran, warning of a severe response should the escalation continue.

The latest hostilities come despite ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Washington.

Earlier this month, Iran and the United States reached a 14-point understanding brokered by Pakistan, which took effect on June 18 after being electronically signed by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and US President Donald Trump.

US President Donald Trump on Friday slammed Iran for carrying out a drone attack in the Strait of Hormuz, calling it a “foolish” violation of the ceasefire in the Middle East war.

“One of the Drones solidly hit the upper deck of a large and very expensive Cargo Carrying Ship” while three others were shot down, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, in an apparent reference to an attack on a vessel the day before.

“Obviously, this is a foolish violation of our Ceasefire Agreement,” Trump added.

The British maritime security agency UKMTO announced on Thursday that a cargo ship in the strait was “hit on the starboard side by an unknown projectile, causing damage to the bridge,” but reported no casualties.

It said the incident occurred just 7.5 nautical miles (14 kilometres) off Oman’s coast.

The secretary general of the UN’s International Maritime Organisation, Arsenio Dominguez, then announced the suspension of efforts to evacuate some 600 ships and 11,000 sailors trapped in the Gulf by the war, which was launched by the US and Israel on February 28.

A ceasefire took effect on April 8, but sporadic violence has continued in the Gulf region, including attacks on ships by Tehran’s forces and US strikes on Iran.

Lebanon, Israel and the United States on Friday signed a trilateral framework agreement aimed at paving the way for a peace deal between the two long-time Middle East adversaries.

The agreement — details of which were not announced — is the result of five rounds of talks in Washington aimed at ending decades of hostilities and weeks of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.

The agreement “begins to put in place a framework for lasting peace and security,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said at the signing ceremony.

Lebanon’s ambassador to Washington, Nada Hamadeh Moawad, said the accord “is a first step on the road to restoring Lebanese sovereignty and territorial integrity, securing a permanent and final cessation of hostilities (and) enabling our people to go back to their land.”

And Israel’s envoy to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, said that under the deal, “Iran is out, Hezbollah is out, and the road to peace between Israel and Lebanon is in.”

Hezbollah drew Lebanon into the broader Middle East war on March 2 with rocket fire at Israel to avenge the killing of Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in US-Israeli strikes.

Israel then launched devastating air strikes and an invasion that Lebanon says have killed more than 4,200 people.

Under US pressure, Lebanese officials began direct talks in April with Israel in Washington, and a truce was announced on April 17 that ultimately failed to stop the fighting.

A new ceasefire was declared this month as Tehran insisted that its deal with Washington to end the broader conflict launched by the United States and Israel in late February must include Lebanon.

Twenty-two Iranian crew members of the vessel Lenore/Davina, seized by US forces during the Iran war, arrived in Karachi on Friday after being repatriated through Pakistan’s facilitation.

Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar announced the development in a post on X, saying arrangements were being finalised with Iranian missions in Pakistan for the crew’s onward return to Iran.

“We remained in close contact with the US and Iranian authorities throughout this process,” Dar said.

The crew served aboard the M/T Davina, one of several commercial vessels targeted after Washington imposed a naval blockade on April 13, interdicting oil tankers and other ships attempting to enter or leave Iranian ports.

Dar said Friday’s group was the fourth batch of Iranian crew members repatriated through Pakistan in the past two months.

“So far, we have assisted in the repatriation of over seventy (70) Iranian brethren (including today’s group of 22) through Pakistani territory,” he said, thanking Tehran for the “trust they have reposed in Pakistan.”

During the war — which began on February 28 and ended with the signing of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding — US forces interdicted commercial vessels linked to Iran across the Persian Gulf and international waters.

Among the ships seized was the M/V Touska, a container vessel belonging to the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, boarded off Chabahar port in the Gulf of Oman on April 19.

Six crew members were freed on April 29; the remaining 22 were evacuated to Pakistan on May 4 before crossing into Iran overland. The Touska was later returned to Pakistan for repairs before being handed back to its owners.

On May 15, Dar announced that 11 Pakistanis and 20 Iranians aboard vessels seized on the high seas had been successfully repatriated.

 “All individuals are in good health and high spirits,” Dar announced, adding that the welfare of Pakistanis abroad, particularly those in distress, remains the government’s highest priority.

 “All individuals have reached Bangkok from Singapore and already boarded the flight scheduled to reach Islamabad later tonight,” he added. “Our [Iranian] brothers will then be facilitated to return to their homeland.”

UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed on Friday stressed the need to protect maritime corridors ​and ensure freedom of navigation through the Strait ‌of Hormuz in a call with his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araqchi.

The exchange, reported by state news agency WAM, marks a rare ​public contact between Abu Dhabi and Tehran following ​tensions linked to the US-Israeli war on Iran.

It ⁠was the first announced conversation between the two ministers ​since the US and Israeli strikes on Iran, which ​were followed by Iranian attacks across the Gulf, including in the United Arab Emirates, where the US has military bases.

Sheikh Abdullah emphasised ​the need for full compliance with a US-Iran memorandum ​of understanding to secure an “immediate and comprehensive cessation of hostilities,” WAM reported.

He ⁠also highlighted respect for sovereignty, adherence to international law and the uninterrupted flow of maritime traffic through Hormuz.

The call suggests an effort to move past strains in UAE-Iran ​relations during ​the conflict, when ⁠Iranian attacks disrupted Dubai’s hotel sector, prompted some expatriates to leave and dented perceptions ​of stability in a country that markets ​itself ⁠as a regional business hub.

Sheikh Abdullah said diplomacy remained the best way to resolve crises, expressing hope that ongoing ⁠efforts would ​lead to lasting security and ​stability in the region, WAM reported.

The UN’s nuclear chief said on Friday that Iran’s pledge not to build a nuclear weapon would need “very strong” verification, as the United States and the Islamic Republic negotiate a permanent settlement to end their war.

Iran’s nuclear programme is a key sticking point in talks to end the Middle East war, which began in late February with massive US-Israeli strikes.

Iran and the US last week signed a preliminary deal to end the conflict, embarking on negotiations expected to address a host of disputes, including the nuclear programme.

But there has been contrasting information from Tehran and Washington on whether UN inspectors will have access to Iranian nuclear facilities.

“I think the objective of this agreement is to ensure that there is no development of nuclear weapons in Iran. The government of Iran has declared quite clearly that this is not their intention,” International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Rafael Grossi said on Friday.

“But of course intentions are not enough. We have to have a very strong verification system in place… as soon as is practicable,” he added.

Grossi said the UN’s nuclear watchdog had so far “barely initiated” talks with Iran following the agreement with the United States.

The deal specifies that the country’s stockpile of enriched uranium should be “downblended” under IAEA supervision.

Before the war the IAEA estimated that Iran had 440 kilograms (970 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60 percent, below the threshold needed to make a bomb, but the fate of that stockpile is unknown after the US and Israel bombed Iranian nuclear facilities last year.

In Tehran meanwhile, people told AFP that despite the diplomatic progress, there had so far been no tangible benefits in everyday life.

“Overall, nothing has improved,” said Amir, 28, a government employee. “Life has simply become more difficult.”

Mehdi, 35, a content creator, said that “until such changes are felt in people’s everyday lives, it is only natural that hope will remain accompanied by doubt, and that anticipation will give way to exhaustion and anxiety”.

‘Going to happen’

Iran’s nuclear programme has long been a source of friction with Western powers, who suspect Tehran is building a bomb despite repeated Iranian denials.

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that Tehran had “fully and completely agreed” to allow UN inspectors to return to the country, while on Wednesday Grossi said inspections of Iranian nuclear sites were “going to happen”.

Iran however said this week it had no intention of admitting the watchdog.

Tehran agreed a landmark nuclear deal with six big powers in 2015 that placed limits on its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief, but Trump walked away from the agreement during his first term as president.

Iran suspended cooperation with the IAEA last year after the US and Israeli attacks in June.

Obstacles ahead

The dispute threatens to derail efforts to reach a permanent settlement between the US and Iran following months of war, with other key disputes being the Strait of Hormuz and Lebanon.

The Strait is a narrow stretch of water between Iran and Oman that leads to the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean, making it a chokepoint for crucial energy shipments out of the Gulf.

Iran closed the waterway during the war in retaliation for US-Israeli strikes, and its control of the strait has emerged as key leverage in the negotiations, as the world economy reels from energy shortages.

On Wednesday, an attack on a ship in the strait led the UN to suspend an effort to evacuate trapped mariners, many of whom have been stranded on the water since the war began.

The British maritime security agency UKMTO said a cargo ship was “hit on the starboard side by an unknown projectile”, but reported no casualties.

Iran has also said it plans to introduce fees for crossing the strait, a scheme vehemently opposed by Washington and most Gulf countries.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, visiting the Gulf on Wednesday, dismissed the idea of charges, saying it would open the door to “total chaos”.

Rubio said the United States wants a deal with Iran but “we don’t want a deal at any price”.

Tehran has also insisted that a Lebanon ceasefire be included in the regional deal, rankling Israel.

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem said Israel has “no option but to withdraw completely from every inch of our Lebanese land” that it had invaded, after the pro-Iran group joined the conflict in retaliation for the US-Israeli killing of Iran’s supreme leader.

Meanwhile, Lebanon’s president Joseph Aoun, who has tried to separate Lebanon from the US-Iran talks.

On Friday, he insisted on Lebanon’s eagerness for “any international formula that strengthens the capabilities of its armed forces, preserves its territorial integrity, and prevents its land from becoming an arena for escalation or regional tensions”.

Iran reasserted its right on Friday to control shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and ​warned Gulf states against siding with the US, a day after an attack on a ship near Oman highlighted the fragility of a preliminary deal to end the ‌Iran war.

Tehran was responding to what it called an “interventionist, irresponsible and provocative” joint statement by the US and six Gulf states that rejected Iran’s insistence that it could charge tolls on vessels transiting the strait.

“Safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz cannot be guaranteed under ambiguous arrangements, parallel routes or decision-making that does not take Iran’s role as a coastal state into account,” Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said on X.

Oil prices dipped ​further on Friday, despite conflicting interpretations of last week’s interim deal between Iran and the US and a slowdown in traffic through the strait, where a fifth of global oil ​and liquefied natural gas supplies typically pass.

Saudi Aramco resumed crude loadings on Friday at its Ras Tanura terminal in the Gulf, the world’s biggest ⁠oil port, after a nearly four-month halt, shipping data showed.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio — wrapping up a tour of the Gulf to reassure nervous regional allies about the interim pact — ​told reporters on Thursday that if Iran threatened or blocked ships in the strait, “we’re going to have a problem.”

In their joint statement, Rubio and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) called for “free, unconditional, and ​unrestricted navigation” in the Strait of Hormuz without tolls or “attempts to assert control”. They said a lasting peace must address Iran’s ballistic missiles, drones and support for proxy groups.

IRAN WARNS AGAINST ‘HOSTILE AND INTERVENTIONIST POLICIES’

Iran’s foreign ministry responded on Friday by saying the US military presence in the Gulf was the source of regional insecurity and division. It said the Strait should be governed by Tehran and Oman in line with the terms ​of the interim deal.

“We warn against the continuation of hostile and interventionist policies in the region,” it said.

Tehran took effective control of the waterway after US-Israeli strikes on Iran on February ​28 triggered the war, disrupting oil flows and rattling global energy markets and the wider economy.

Taiwan’s Evergreen Marine said on Friday its Singapore-flagged ship Ever Lovely had been hit close to Oman on Thursday ‌by an “unknown object” ⁠while on a route recommended by the British navy agency UKMTO.

Nobody was hurt in the incident, and the ship later resumed its journey out of the strait.

Two US officials told Reuters that Iran had fired on the ship, while Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority — established by Tehran to manage requests for ships to travel through the Strait — said passage through unauthorised routes would be “the responsibility of the owner, operator, and vessel commander”.

There was no immediate comment from the US government. US President Donald Trump warned earlier this month that if Iran did not honour the interim deal, ​including reopening the Strait, the US would probably ​go back to bombing the country.

LEBANON, NUCLEAR ⁠INSPECTIONS, AMONG POINTS OF CONTENTION

Alongside the issue of control over the strait, disagreements persist over other elements of the framework ceasefire deal, including over financial incentives for Iran, nuclear inspections, and Israel’s parallel war in Lebanon.

The deal has set up 60 days of talks to tackle thornier ​issues, including Iran’s nuclear programme.

In the United States, the war is weighing heavily on Trump ahead of the November midterm elections that will determine ​control of Congress.

The International Maritime ⁠Organisation, a UN agency, temporarily paused its operation to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz after the Oman incident.

The IMO and Oman had earlier this week announced a new southern route through the strait to evacuate hundreds of ships stranded by the war, angering Tehran.

South Korea’s President Lee Jae Myung said on Friday that three South Korean ships would leave the Strait of Hormuz over the ⁠weekend after the ​Oceans Ministry reported that eight more South Korean vessels had exited.

Two Very Large Crude Carriers controlled by Saudi Arabia’s shipping ​arm, Bahri, were seen loading crude at Ras Tanura, while another waited nearby, shipping data showed. Each VLCC can load 2 million barrels of oil.

Ras Tanura sits on Saudi Arabia’s eastern coast on the Gulf and is west of ​the Strait of Hormuz. It used to export more than five million bpd of crude before the conflict.

Iran on Friday rejected statements made in a joint declaration issued after a meeting between the US and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), describing them as “interventionist, irresponsible and provocative.”

In a statement on Friday, Iran’s Foreign Ministry accused Washington of undermining regional security through its military presence and policies.

The ministry dismissed US assertions of a continued commitment to the security of Gulf states as “rhetoric” that distorted the reality of the region, arguing that the American military presence had become a source of instability, division and insecurity.

The ministry pointed to the use of military bases and facilities in some regional countries during the recent conflict between Iran and the US and Israel, saying the events demonstrated that Washington placed little value on regional security or bilateral relations.

Iran also called on countries in the Gulf region whose territory or facilities were used during the conflict to reassess their policies, stressing that under international law and the principles of good neighbourly relations, states have an obligation to prevent third parties from using their territory to launch military aggression against neighbouring countries.

The Foreign Ministry also rejected allegations concerning Iran’s nuclear programme, describing accusations promoted by the United States and Israel as fabricated and politically motivated.

It urged Gulf countries not to align themselves with what it called Washington’s “threat narrative” and instead support efforts to establish a nuclear weapons-free zone in West Asia.

The statement maintained that lasting peace and stability in the region could only be achieved through cooperation and confidence-building among regional states without external interference, and rejected claims that Iran posed a threat to its neighbours as part of what it described as an “Iranophobia agenda” promoted by the United States and Israel.

Tehran also condemned efforts to portray its military and defensive capabilities as a threat to the region, accusing Washington of pursuing a “divide and rule” strategy that had fuelled an arms race across the Middle East.

Reaffirming its position on national security, Iran said it would not compromise on defending its sovereignty or its defensive capabilities.

It also criticised the GCC’s alignment with the United States and Israel in describing Palestinian and Lebanese resistance groups as Iranian proxies.

“The only proxy entity in the region is the Zionist regime,” the statement said, adding that the Palestinian and Lebanese struggles against occupation and apartheid were legitimate under international law.

The Foreign Ministry also held the United States, Israel and countries that supported their recent military actions against Iran responsible for heightened tensions in the Strait of Hormuz.

It stressed that the strategic waterway lies within the territorial waters of Iran and Oman and said arrangements outlined in the memorandum ending the recent conflict provided the operational framework for managing navigation in the area.

Concluding its statement, Tehran urged Gulf states to reconsider their security policies in light of the recent conflict, arguing that genuine collective security in the region could only be achieved through cooperation among regional countries without foreign intervention.

The United States and Iran have agreed to establish a direct military deconfliction channel involving officials from the US Central Command (CENTCOM) and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in Qatar, marking an unprecedented step between two longtime adversaries despite Washington’s designation of the IRGC as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation.

US Vice President JD Vance disclosed the arrangement in an interview with British news outlet UnHerd, published on Thursday, saying the mechanism was one of the key outcomes of US-Iran negotiations held in Switzerland earlier this week.

“One of the things we wanted to come out with was a channel on the Iranian side for reducing conflict, which we did,” Vance said.

“They were like, ‘OK, fine, we’ll send somebody from the IRGC to go hang out in Doha with somebody from CENTCOM,’ and that’s how we’re going to settle a lot of these disputes.”

The revelation is notable because it would bring US military officials into direct contact with the IRGC, which Washington designated a terrorist organisation in 2019.

It also comes only weeks after US and Israeli forces reportedly targeted IRGC personnel during the recent conflict with Iran.

Although US officials had previously confirmed that contact with the IRGC had been established during negotiations following the recent conflict, Vance’s latest comments suggest those contacts will now be at the military level.

Vance had announced before leaving Switzerland that Washington and Tehran had agreed to establish two new mechanisms — one to help ensure freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz and another to maintain a regional ceasefire, particularly in Lebanon.

It remains unclear whether the CENTCOM-IRGC coordination hub in Doha will oversee one or both of those arrangements.

The Lebanon-related mechanism has already drawn criticism from Israel, which opposes any formal Iranian role in discussions concerning Lebanon.

In response, Washington has also announced a separate deconfliction framework involving Israeli and Lebanese military officials alongside CENTCOM to address ceasefire violations in real time, although it remains unclear how the two mechanisms will operate alongside each other.

Analysts say the new arrangement reflects Washington’s recognition that Tehran’s influence is critical to maintaining regional stability, particularly in the Strait of Hormuz and through its ties with Hezbollah.

The decision has also raised legal and operational questions. Although US officials had previously confirmed that contact with the IRGC had been established during negotiations following the recent conflict, Vance’s latest comments suggest those contacts are now moving beyond diplomatic channels to direct military-to-military engagement.

The IRGC combines military and intelligence functions and is Iran’s most powerful security institution, leading some observers to question why CENTCOM, rather than the CIA or the US State Department, will serve as Washington’s primary interlocutor.

Traditionally, sensitive contacts between the United States and hostile states have been conducted discreetly through intelligence agencies rather than the military.

However, analysts said the public nature of the new arrangement may have made direct military-to-military engagement the more practical option.

Some also argued that regular communication between military officials could be more effective than political dialogue in preventing misunderstandings and reducing the risk of future conflict.

CENTCOM commander Gen. Brad Cooper has previously participated in discussions related to Iran, though those engagements involved Iranian civilian diplomats rather than IRGC officials.

Vance also said the agreement Washington ultimately seeks would differ substantially from the 2015 nuclear deal, arguing that it would include a far stricter inspection regime and eliminate Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium — conditions that Tehran has repeatedly rejected.

The vice president further claimed that the framework had encouraged unprecedented engagement between Iran and Gulf Arab states, including discussions between the United Arab Emirates and the IRGC on potential economic cooperation.

Regional analysts, however, contend that the recent diplomatic outreach between Iran and its Gulf neighbours stems largely from concerns that the United States has become a less reliable security partner, prompting Arab states to pursue improved ties with Tehran to safeguard their own interests.

The Gulf’s top diplomats said on Thursday that dealing with Iran’s proxies and missiles was key to lasting peace, and that any trade and investment with Tehran would be reversible and contingent on it respecting its deal with the US.

“The Ministers further emphasised that lasting regional peace and security requires addressing the full spectrum of Iran’s threats, including its ballistic missiles, drones, and support of proxies in the region,” they said in a joint statement following a meeting co-chaired by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

“Any trade and investment with Iran is conditional and reversible, contingent on Iran’s compliance with the MOU and the final agreement, cessation of its destabilising behaviour, and creation of the conditions necessary for economic engagement,” they added.

A shouting match over Iran between US President Donald Trump and a senior Republican senator overshadowed efforts by ​America’s top diplomat on Thursday to swing Washington’s sceptical Gulf allies behind a preliminary deal with Tehran.

In a closed-door meeting with fellow Republicans on Wednesday, Trump clashed with Senator ‌Bill Cassidy, who said the administration needed to better explain the agreement signed last week that appears to fall short of the goals Trump set out at the start of the war.

Several Republicans who attended Wednesday’s meeting — held shortly before his administration asked Congress for tens of billions of dollars to pay for the conflict — said Trump’s exchange with Cassidy turned into a shouting match as the senator pushed for more clarity on the deal.

But Senate Republicans appeared to back down, ​calling a late-night vote to block an Iran war powers resolution after two members of the party who had supported previous resolutions calling for an end to hostilities without lawmakers’ approval ​changed their votes.

Cassidy voted no after thanking Trump’s administration for a briefing at the White House about the war.

Overall, the tally was 50 to ⁠47 to block a war powers resolution that had advanced on a procedural vote in May. The resolution directed Trump to withdraw US forces from hostilities with Iran until the deployment is authorised by Congress.

“This vote ​puts Iran on notice,” Trump said on social media after Wednesday’s vote.

RUBIO TRIES TO REASSURE GULF ALLIES

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio sought to reassure Gulf allies, who are also wary of the accord.

Wrapping ​up a Gulf tour in Bahrain — home to the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet — he told reporters that Gulf allies shared some serious concerns and that they wanted to be kept informed of every step of the peace accord with Tehran, which includes provisions on the Strait of Hormuz.

Oil prices fell to pre-war levels after US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said shipments through the strait were approaching levels seen before the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran on February 28, with at least ​20 million barrels exiting the strait in the previous 24 hours.

During the conflict, Iran took effective control of the vital chokepoint, disrupting oil flows and rattling global energy markets and the wider economy.

Despite the recovery ​in traffic, Iran signalled it would continue to assert control. The Revolutionary Guards on Thursday warned vessels to stick to routes through the strait designated by Tehran, rejecting newly announced shipping routes not coordinated with Iran as unacceptable and ‌dangerous.

The warning came ⁠after Oman announced temporary shipping lanes through the strait in coordination with the United Nations’ shipping agency. Data from the UN’s International Maritime Organisation showed that 57 ships have transited the strait since June 23 under the evacuation plan.

If Iran threatens or blocks ships in the strait, “then we’re going to have a problem,” Rubio said, having earlier told ministers that “no country on Earth has the right to charge for the use of international waterways” and that shipping fees would never be part of any deal.

CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF THE DEAL

The war is weighing heavily on Trump ahead of the November elections that will determine control of Congress. Just one ​in four Americans believes the war was worth ​its costs, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed.

Conflicting accounts have emerged ⁠over elements of the framework deal, which has prompted criticism of Trump at home and abroad.

Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said on Thursday that the US assertion that Iran would spend its unfrozen assets to buy US agricultural products was false.

Disagreements also persist over financial incentives for Iran, nuclear inspections, control of the ​Strait of Hormuz and Israel’s parallel war in Lebanon.

The deal sets up 60 days of talks to tackle thornier issues, such as Iran’s nuclear programme.

REGIONAL ​SCEPTICISM

The deal has provoked scepticism ⁠in the Middle East, where many states came under attack from Iran during the war and view it as too generous to Tehran, including a $300 billion fund and the easing of some sanctions.

Washington’s Gulf allies fear the reconstruction fund could help Iran rebuild its military. The accord also does not address Tehran’s ballistic missile capacity.

Under the agreement, Iran must allow shipping to move freely through the Strait of Hormuz for 60 days, and Tehran has ⁠suggested it might ​impose tolls after that. Washington and its Gulf allies oppose such fees.

CONFLICT IN LEBANON

On Thursday, senior Israeli and Lebanese officials denied ​there had been any Israeli withdrawal from occupied southern Lebanon, after a US official said Israel had pulled some of its troops back in a good faith gesture.

Israel has been battling Hezbollah in Lebanon since the militant group attacked Israel on March 2 ​in support of Iran, and Tehran has made a cessation of hostilities there central to its demands in any lasting peace deal with the United States.

Israel said on Thursday that it had set no timetable for withdrawing its forces from Lebanon, Gaza and Syria, as Israeli and Lebanese officials engaged in US-brokered talks in Washington.

The Israeli military has launched widespread airstrikes in Lebanon and sent troops into the country’s south after Hezbollah, backed by Iran, entered the Middle East war on the side of its patron in March.

“We must remain in the security zone in Lebanon, in Syria, and in Gaza, and not for a limited time, in order to defend our residents and communities from there against jihadist elements,” Defence Minister Israel Katz said at a graduation ceremony at a military academy.

“We oppose the withdrawal of IDF forces from the security zone in Lebanon, despite all the pressures that exist and those still to come.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the same function that troops would remain in south Lebanon “as long as necessary”.

“I have made it clear to the IDF: you have full freedom of action.”

Earlier on Thursday, government spokesman David Mencer told journalists that “we will not withdraw our forces from southern Lebanon as long as Hezbollah remains a threat, are not disarmed and are not demilitarised”.

Under US pressure, Lebanese officials began direct talks in April with Israel in Washington.

The latest three-day round of talks is due to wrap up on Thursday.

Commenting on the negotiations, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the two neighbours were close to making a “commitment of intent”.

Asked about the talks, Mencer said: “We are making extremely clear that our responsibility is to our northern citizens and to the whole of Israel, and we will not allow any terrorist force anywhere near our border – which means that any redeployment of IDF forces comes after, not before, but after the demilitarisation of southern Lebanon and the disarming of Hezbollah.”

“We’ve already been in this situation in 2024,” he added. “Hezbollah were supposed to be disarmed. They weren’t.”

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday warned of “total chaos” if ships were charged to pass through the vital Strait of Hormuz, as Oman said it too rejected imposing fees.

The comments from Rubio and his Omani counterpart came after the top US diplomat met with Gulf foreign ministers at the end of a three-day regional tour.

Iran and Oman, which straddle the narrow waterway, had earlier said they were considering charging costs related to the strait, insisting they held sovereignty over it.

The Hormuz normally carries one-fifth of the world’s crude oil and liquefied natural gas, but it was all but closed by Iran during the Middle East war, sending energy prices soaring.

“International waterways do not belong to any nation state. This is a foundational principle in the world today, without which the world would be in total chaos,” Rubio told a Gulf Cooperation Council meeting in Bahrain.

“If in fact we accepted that you can charge money to use an international waterway because it happens to be near your territorial space, well then this will spread throughout the world like a contagion.”

Iran lifted its blockade of the Hormuz after it struck an initial deal with the US to end the Middle East war, and negotiations on a permanent settlement of the conflict are ongoing.

Before Rubio’s remarks, Iran reiterated that ships must seek its authorisation before crossing.

But Oman also announced a new temporary route through the strait running close to its coast, which Iran appeared to denounce.

Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi told Thursday’s meeting that “future arrangements regarding the Strait do not entail the imposition of any transit fees”, his ministry said.

‘Zero support’

Rubio said there was “zero support” for Hormuz tolls among Gulf countries, which rely heavily on the strait to export their oil and gas.

He added that relations with Oman — which US President Donald Trump threatened to “blow up” last month over alleged attempts to control Hormuz — were now “fine”.

“I mean, ultimately there’s not going to be any fees or tolls. They (Oman) were there in the meeting today and they said that they are not in favour of the tolling system,” Rubio said.

The future of the strait, only about 30 kilometres (18 miles) wide at its narrowest point, is a key sticking point in the negotiations between Tehran and Washington.

After Oman announced its temporary route through the strait, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards denounced the move by “certain authorities”, without naming them.

The Guards, the ideological arm of Iran’s military, also said “the only authorised route… is the route announced by the Islamic Republic of Iran”.

Oman said the new corridor was coordinated with the International Maritime Organisation, the UN agency responsible for marine safety.

The memorandum of understanding signed last week by Tehran and Washington to end their war stipulated that commercial ships may transit the strait free of charge for the next 60 days.

It is unclear what arrangements will be in place after that period.

Rubio said the US wants a lasting settlement with Iran to permanently end their war, but not “at any price”.

Iran’s Parliament Speaker Bagher Ghalibaf on Thursday rejected US claims that Tehran would use billions of dollars in restored assets to purchase American agricultural products under a recent agreement between the two countries.

In a post on the social media platform X, Ghalibaf dismissed the assertion and accused Washington of misrepresenting the terms regarding Iran’s unfrozen funds.

“America falsely claims our unfrozen assets will buy their agriculture. Interesting. The only crop we’re harvesting is what you planted: decades of mistrust. It’s organic, abundant, and homegrown. But apparently the US only exports GMO soybeans, broken promises and trash talks,” he wrote.

His remarks came after US President Donald Trump said that $12 billion in Iranian assets would be released under a new agreement between Washington and Tehran, but would remain in a designated account.

According to Trump, Iran would be allowed to use the funds only to purchase agricultural products such as corn, soybeans and wheat from American farmers, as well as medicines.

US Vice President JD Vance and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also backed the proposal, saying the funds, overseen by Qatar, would be used in a way that benefits the US agricultural sector.

Iran, however, has firmly rejected the notion that Washington can dictate how the restored assets are spent.

Iranian officials involved in negotiations with the United States, including Ghalibaf and the Foreign Ministry, have maintained that Tehran alone will decide where and how its funds are used.

They said that if Iran chooses to import agricultural products, it will do so based on market prices, quality and national interests, rather than any conditions imposed by the United States.

The exchange highlights continuing disagreements between Tehran and Washington despite ongoing negotiations aimed at implementing and expanding the recent agreement.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday warned that any tolls on ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz would set a precedent and risk “total chaos,” while Oman said no fees would be imposed.

Rubio’s comments during a tour of the Gulf came hours after Iran repeated that ships must seek its authorisation before crossing.

The statement by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards followed an announcement by neighbouring Oman of a new temporary shipping route through the strait running close to its coast, which Iran appeared to denounce.

Oman’s top diplomat, for his part, said no transit fees would be imposed in the Strait.

Badr Albusaidi said “future arrangements regarding the Strait do not entail the imposition of any transit fees,” during a meeting of Gulf foreign ministers in the Bahraini capital Manama with US Secretary Marco Rubio, whose administration has repeatedly opposed any fees or tolls.

Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, later “emphasised the importance of continued coordination” with Oman.

“International waterways do not belong to any nation-state. This is a foundational principle in the world today, without which the world would be in total chaos,” Rubio told a Gulf Cooperation Council meeting in Bahrain.

“If in fact, we accepted that you can charge money to use an international waterway because it happens to be near your territorial space, well then, this will spread throughout the world like a contagion.”

The future of the strait, a vital route for energy shipments that was blockaded by Iran during the war, is a key sticking point in negotiations between Tehran and Washington to end their war.

Tehran has said it plans to impose what it calls maritime service fees, as opposed to tolls, while the United States argues it is an international waterway and therefore should not be charged.

“The only authorised route for passage through the Strait of Hormuz is the route announced by the Islamic Republic of Iran,” said the Revolutionary Guards, the ideological arm of Iran’s military.

Any crossing without authorisation is “unacceptable and extremely dangerous”, they said in a statement, warning that vessels not complying “will be dealt with”.

They also appeared to denounce the new route released by Oman, but only referred to “certain authorities” rather than Muscat directly.

Oman, which sits on the other side of the strait from Iran, said the new corridor was coordinated with the International Maritime Organisation, a UN agency responsible for marine safety.

The only route currently authorised by Iran runs through a corridor that follows the Iranian coast.

Hormuz is a narrow stretch of water between Iran and the Gulf countries through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s crude oil and liquified natural gas normally transits.

At its narrowest it is only about 30 kilometres (18 miles) wide.

A memorandum of understanding signed last week by Tehran and Washington to end their war stipulated that commercial ships may transit the strait free of charge for the next 60 days.

With Iran and the US in further negotiations, it is unclear what arrangements will be in place after that period.

Rubio said the US wants a lasting settlement with Iran to end their war but not “at any price”.

Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar said on Thursday that after making Pakistan a nuclear power, the government’s next priority was to transform the country into an economic power.

He was speaking to reporters in Lahore at the mausoleum of Sufi saint Hazrat Syed Ali bin Usman Al-Hajveri, popularly known as Data Ganj Bakhsh, where he took part in the annual ritual washing of the shrine and laid floral wreaths.

Punjab Ministers Chaudhry Shafay Hussain, Bilal Yasin, Mujtaba Shuja-ur-Rehman, Mian Marghoob Ahmed and officials of the Auqaf Department also took part in the ceremony.

Dar said Pakistan’s economy would have been stronger today had obstacles not been placed in the country’s path to development.

The deputy prime minister said the current federal budget had provided tax relief of Rs361 billion to the public.

Responding to a question, Dar said Pakistan had emerged as a peacemaker on the global stage after playing a role in mediation efforts between Iran and the United States.

Dar said Pakistan was among the first countries to condemn the US-Israeli military strikes on Iran and had made practical efforts to help bring an end to the conflict.

He said the nation was grateful for the international recognition and respect Pakistan had received during the mediation process, adding that the country’s diplomatic initiatives had contributed to promoting peace and stability in the region.

The deputy prime minister said the government had taken steps to reverse what he described as the flawed economic policies of the previous administration and had placed the country on a path towards economic development.

He reiterated the government’s commitment to economic growth and regional stability, saying Pakistan would continue to play a constructive role in promoting peace and cooperation.

Referring to the prevailing security situation in the region, Dar said that Pakistan remained fully capable of defending itself and would effectively respond to any act of aggression.

Special prayers were offered at the conclusion of the ceremony for the country’s security, prosperity and stability.

Iran on Thursday said NATO member states Italy and Romania should be held accountable for supporting the US-Israeli military campaign against Tehran, citing remarks by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that the two countries had assisted the operation.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei made the remarks in a post on X after NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte reportedly identified Italy and Romania as countries that had supported military operations against Iran.

“Italy and Romania are explicitly named by NATO’s secretary general as having participated in the aggression against Iran,” Baghaei said.

He alleged that the two countries, along with other European states that assisted the US-Israeli campaign, should explain their actions to the international community and their own citizens, accusing them of involvement in attacks on several Iranian cities, including Tehran, Isfahan, Shiraz, Tabriz, Hamadan and Bandar Abbas.

Baghaei’s comments came after Rutte told Fox News that Italy had allowed hundreds of US military aircraft to operate from bases on its territory, while Romania had restricted commercial air traffic from Bucharest to facilitate American military operations against Iran.

The Iranian spokesman described the remarks as a “clear and damning admission” of NATO’s involvement in what he called an unlawful war against a sovereign state and said both the alliance and participating member states should be held responsible for the consequences.

“The organisation and its individual member states that participated in such decision-making must be held accountable for all the consequences,” he said.

The conflict began on February 28 when the United States and Israel launched air strikes against Iran.

Tehran says the attacks targeted senior Iranian officials and military commanders.

Iran maintains that its military response and its control over the Strait of Hormuz helped force its adversaries to accept a ceasefire more than a month later.

Iran and the United States subsequently signed a memorandum of understanding on July 17 aimed at permanently ending hostilities and paving the way for further negotiations on a comprehensive agreement within 60 days.

US Secretary of State Marco ​Rubio will meet with Bahrain officials on Thursday on the final leg of a trip to the ‌Middle East, where he has sought to sell the Trump administration’s preliminary Iran accord to sceptical Gulf Arab allies.

Rubio has acknowledged his delicate mission in pitching the peace deal to Gulf Arab leaders who fear excessive concessions will strengthen Tehran and reshape the region’s security balance and ​oil flows.

Arriving on Wednesday night in Bahrain’s capital Manama, which hosts the headquarters of the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet, ​Rubio will also meet with the Gulf Cooperation Council, or GCC, which includes Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait, besides Bahrain.

His three-day tour of the oil-rich ​Gulf is the first high-level diplomatic mission since the US-Iran framework agreement last week to end the conflict.

At his previous stops ​in the UAE and Kuwait, Rubio sought to assure officials that the proposed deal was not overly favourable to Iran, which struck several Gulf states during the US-Israeli war.

“We’re not going to do anything that undermines the security of our allies, our longstanding allies in the region,” he ​told reporters in Kuwait.

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that Iran had agreed to nuclear inspections into “infinity,” while Tehran said it ​had made no such concession in negotiations, raising questions about the viability of their fragile peace deal.

The two countries, which ended a first ‌round ⁠of negotiations in Switzerland on Monday, have also offered conflicting accounts about financial incentives for Iran, control of the Strait of Hormuz, and Israel’s parallel war in Lebanon.

All six GCC nations are strategic US allies that offered some degree of logistical support to Washington during the war, and all were buffeted by Iranian air strikes as a result.

Together, they make up the backbone of ​America’s security architecture in the ​Middle East, and any countries ⁠rethinking their security relationship with the US could have a significant impact on US military strategy in the region.

The draft US-Iran agreement includes no limits on Iran’s ballistic missiles, a proposed $300 ​billion reconstruction fund and provisions that could expand Tehran’s regional influence and control over critical ​oil shipping lanes.

Rubio ⁠has said he would not be asking regional allies to contribute to any reconstruction fund during the trip, even as the MoU with Iran suggests that countries in the region would at least be partially responsible for footing the bill.

Some US Gulf allies are ⁠privately feeling ​disappointed over the interim deal that could open the door to US ​normalisation with Iran, which most GCC states consider their main adversary.

Bahrain is concerned that ​a financially liberated Tehran could foment unrest in the region.

The biggest casualty of the US-Iran deal may not be Israel’s Iran strategy, but the political brand Benjamin Netanyahu spent decades constructing as the Israeli leader who could uniquely bend Washington to his will on Iran, analysts, former US officials and diplomats say.

Netanyahu built his political ​identity on an audacious assertion: that he alone could keep the US and Israel in strategic lockstep on Iran.

Cultivating Republican support, he cast himself as the only Israeli leader capable of influencing successive US presidents ‌and insisted that only sustained military pressure could contain Tehran.

At the height of his power, he was described by diplomats as the “American whisperer” — the Israeli leader who could pick up the phone and ensure Washington’s strategic calculus aligned with that of Israel.

No other Israeli prime minister, they note, addressed Congress as often or built such enduring political capital across the American political system.

But analysts say Washington and Tehran’s interim pact to end the war that the US and Israel launched in February shows how that narrative has been reversed.

Rather than shaping Washington’s Iran policy, Netanyahu is now forced to accept ​it, as US President Donald Trump pursues a settlement that increasingly treats Israeli objections as constraints.

At home, the reckoning is equally stark, said former US official Dennis Ross.

Netanyahu is increasingly boxed in between a US president intent on ​ending the conflict and a domestic base resistant to concessions, particularly in Lebanon, he said.

Withdrawal risks political backlash, while escalation risks confrontation with Washington.

The war Netanyahu hoped would cement his legacy ⁠as the leader who confronted Iran may instead be remembered as the conflict that dismantled a central source of his power.

Isolated abroad, constrained by his closest ally and vulnerable ahead of an autumn election, he now finds the political asset on which he ​built his career has become his greatest liability.

At the outset of the war with Iran, Netanyahu promised ultimate victory.

He delivered neither the collapse of Iran’s ruling system, nor the defeat of Lebanon’s Hezbollah, nor a safe return for residents of northern Israel.

“The US-Iran deal ​is a decisive blow to Netanyahu,” said Aviv Bushinsky, a former Netanyahu adviser.

“Not only did he lose the war with Iran, he has also lost Trump as a friend. He is now isolated not only internationally, but locked in a major dispute with Trump,” he said.

Netanyahu’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

In a press conference this month, the Israeli premier described his relationship with Trump as one between partners who “agree many times and sometimes disagree”.

There had been a systematic campaign to diminish Israel’s “huge achievements” against Iran and its proxies, he said.

A White House official ​said Trump and Netanyahu had a strong relationship and that Israel’s military forces had been “incredible partners” in a war that had “decimated the Iranian regime’s military capabilities”.

Public rebukes

The disagreement between the US and Israeli leaders, analysts say, extends beyond personal ties to a growing ​divergence in goals: Trump seeks to disengage from another Middle East war, while Netanyahu views continued pressure on Iran and its ally Hezbollah as essential to Israel’s security.

Washington has negotiated directly with Tehran, folded Lebanon’s conflict between Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah into a broader framework, and created ‌mechanisms to manage ⁠ceasefire disputes — moves that, according to three regional diplomatic sources, have increasingly sidelined Israel from key decisions.

The country that once viewed Netanyahu as an indispensable interlocutor is now, the regional sources say, treating him as an obstacle to an agreement it is determined to protect.

Trump has publicly rebuked Israel’s military conduct in Lebanon, while Vice President JD Vance has underscored the conditional nature of the relationship, warning Israeli critics of the deal against “attacking the only powerful ally they have left in the world.”

Two Israeli officials familiar with Netanyahu’s thinking said he was not concerned that public remarks by Trump and Vance would translate into meaningful shifts in US policy toward Israel, such as delays in arms deliveries, even if Israel continues military operations in Lebanon.

Trump has signalled that he is prepared to override Israeli priorities ​in pursuit of US interests.

In a TV interview this month, ​he said that if he tells Netanyahu “to do something, ⁠he does it“.

Republican safety net

Iran will seek to widen the emerging gap between the US and Israel by portraying any Israeli military action in Lebanon as an attempt to sabotage Trump’s diplomacy, forcing the White House to choose between backing its ally or preserving the deal, said Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group.

What makes Netanyahu’s position so precarious, US analysts say, is the ​loss of his safety net.

For years, he cultivated Republican backing, using it as a counterweight to offset tensions with Democratic administrations, and openly denouncing former President Barack Obama’s 2015 Iran ​nuclear deal from a congressional podium.

But ⁠Republicans will not break with Trump for Netanyahu, they said.

Against this backdrop, the implications of the US-Iran deal also extend to Netanyahu’s core strategic bets.

He staked his political future on two objectives: weakening, if not toppling, Iran’s theocratic leadership and securing normalised relations with Saudi Arabia by expanding the Abraham Accords.

Neither has materialised. Iranian leaders have emerged from the conflict entrenched, while the Saudi handshake remains out of reach.

Across the region, a recalibration is already visible.

Countries Netanyahu once hoped to draw closer — with Saudi Arabia as the crown jewel — are now hedging, slowing ⁠normalisation with Israel while ​cautiously reopening channels with Tehran.

According to Gulf sources, the logic that underpinned the Abraham Accords has been eroded by the Gaza war, the unresolved question of West ​Bank annexation, and a growing perception that Netanyahu’s Israel may be more of a liability than an asset in any emerging regional order.

An Iranian official said Netanyahu’s push to expand the Abraham Accords has been blunted, with several countries now seeking a place in an emerging Iran-aligned framework.

“This is not just a victory for ​Iran. It’s a failure for Netanyahu,” the official said.

The Islamic Republic has not just survived — it has emerged as a more influential regional player.

US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that it may never be known who was at fault for a ​deadly strike on a girls’ school in Iran on February ‌28, the first day of the Iran war, that killed scores of children.

Reuters first reported in March that an initial internal US military investigation showed US forces were likely responsible ​for the fatal strike in Minab in southern Iran.

The Pentagon ​has since elevated the probe, but it has not acknowledged any ⁠preliminary findings.

“I don’t know that they are ever going to solve ​that problem,” Trump told reporters.

“I don’t know that they are ever going to ​solve that problem in terms of whose fault was it because there were missiles flying all over the place, and it’s horrible what happened, but there were missiles flying ​all over the place,” he said.

“Somebody said it was our missile, maybe ​it wasn’t our missile, but I have seen nothing to lead me to believe ‌it ⁠was,” Trump remarked, adding: “I don’t think it was us.”

The strike on February 28, when the US and Israel attacked Iran, killed more than 175 children and teachers, according to Iranian officials.

The strike may be the result of US use ​of outdated targeting ​data, sources familiar ⁠with the matter told Reuters in March.

Deliberately attacking a school would likely be a war crime under international humanitarian ​law.

US officials have publicly said Washington would not deliberately ​target a ⁠school.

The strike caused global outrage. The UN human rights office called it “absolutely horrific.”

Trump initially claimed, without evidence, that Iran was responsible.

He has since said he does not ⁠know ​enough about the strike, that an investigation ​is ongoing, that he will accept the results of the inquiry and that “nobody” purposefully attacked the ​school.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has warned shipowners against using any new transit routes through the Strait of Hormuz without Tehran’s approval, threatening action against vessels that fail to comply with Iranian instructions.

The IRGC declared that any new transit route through the Strait of Hormuz established without coordination with Tehran is “unacceptable and dangerous.”

The warning signals Iran’s determination to maintain control over navigation through the strategic waterway despite a memorandum of understanding signed with the United States last week aimed at reopening the vital energy corridor after months of conflict.

According to Iranian media reports, the IRGC Navy said only shipping lanes designated by Iran are authorised for passage and that vessels must coordinate with Iranian forces through established communication channels.

“Navigation outside these routes is highly dangerous and prohibited,” the IRGC Navy said, urging all vessels to avoid travelling beyond designated corridors.

The statement came days after a leading maritime information group recommended alternative shipping routes through the strait, advising shipowners to use a southern corridor along Omani territorial waters with transponder signals activated.

The advisory said the southern route had been cleared of mines and was considered the preferred option for transit.

Shipping activity through the Strait of Hormuz has shown signs of recovery, though traffic remains below pre-conflict levels.

Data from vessel-tracking firm MarineTraffic showed that transits rose to 93 over the weekend, nearly triple the volume recorded during the previous comparable period.

Before the conflict, more than 100 vessels passed through the strait daily.

MarineTraffic also reported 31 verified crossings by commercial and energy-carrying vessels on Tuesday, noting that operators continue to adopt a cautious approach by using a combination of Iranian, Omani and International Maritime Organisation-approved routes.

The dispute over navigation comes amid growing international scrutiny of Iran’s role in the waterway.

In May, the United States imposed sanctions on Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority, accusing it of attempting to “extort global maritime trade.”

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned that Washington would oppose any system of tolls or restrictions on shipping through the strait.

Analysts say continued Iranian influence over the Strait of Hormuz could have lasting implications for global energy markets, with tanker traffic unlikely to return fully to pre-war levels if Tehran retains operational control of the chokepoint.

Helima Croft, head of global commodity strategy at RBC Capital Markets, said any post-conflict arrangement that leaves Iran exercising significant control over the strait would likely result in lower shipping volumes through one of the world’s most important oil transit routes.