WASHINGTON (Dispatches) – U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday threatened to bomb Oman if Muscat “gets in the way” of Washington’s efforts to reach an arrangement with Iran over the Strait of Hormuz, adding a dangerous new dimension to an already tense regional crisis.

Speaking to Fox News, Trump was asked about parallel negotiations between Iran and Oman concerning the strategic waterway. He responded with a threat of military action against the U.S. ally, while simultaneously demanding that Iran “put up the white flag of surrender.”

The threat is not an isolated statement. Trump had already warned Oman in May to “behave,” threatening that the United States would “blow up” the country if it opposed Washington’s position. 

The latest remarks therefore reinforce a pattern of pressure against Muscat as Oman continues its traditional role as a regional mediator.

The timing is particularly significant. Iran and Oman have been conducting intensive negotiations over arrangements for maritime transit through the Strait of Hormuz. 

On Monday, Tehran said the two sides had reached an understanding on a proposed transit route and were working to finalize a joint declaration. The discussions emphasize the sovereign rights of the coastal states and safe navigation in accordance with international law.

From Tehran’s perspective, the issue is not simply commercial navigation. Iran has maintained that the security of the Strait cannot be separated from the security of the region and that any restoration of normal maritime traffic requires an end to U.S. military pressure, including the naval blockade and other actions that Tehran says violated previous commitments.

The dispute also has an important legal and financial dimension. A Financial Times report examining a possible Iran-Oman management framework noted that JPMorgan analysts 

and international-law specialists have identified precedents in which states bordering strategic straits have imposed charges for specific maritime services. 
Earlier reporting has likewise highlighted the possibility of Iran and Oman establishing service charges rather than conventional transit tolls. Reuters reported in July that Oman had presented Iran with a Persian Gulf-backed proposal that included fees for vessels using the waterway.
The Financial Times analysis also cited historical precedents involving Denmark and Turkey, suggesting that carefully structured charges for genuine maritime services could have a legal basis. 
For Tehran and Muscat, therefore, the emerging framework is about establishing predictable navigation, security arrangements and associated maritime services while preserving the sovereign rights of the coastal states. 
Washington’s threats against Oman risk undermining precisely the diplomatic process that could provide a negotiated and orderly mechanism for restoring shipping through one of the world’s most important energy corridors.
Trump’s renewed threat thus places Oman in an increasingly difficult position: a longtime U.S. partner and regional mediator now faces pressure from Washington precisely as it works with Iran to develop a framework for secure navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.