In an opinion piece published in Le Monde, Oman's Foreign Minister Badr Al-Busaidi writes that the recent conflict in the Gulf has left the region deeply scarred and that a clear-eyed assessment is now overdue. In his view, the most serious threats to regional stability emanate not from Tehran but from Tel Aviv.

The people of the Sultanate of Oman and its Gulf neighbors are living with the consequences of a war that, in his assessment, should never have taken place. Their foremost hope, he writes, is that the international community is genuinely witnessing the conclusion of the conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran — rather than merely a temporary pause in hostilities.

Although the war has not been formally declared over, and despite the risk that one party could recklessly reignite it, Al-Busaidi argues that the international community must begin drawing lessons from what has transpired. Rather than dwelling on the mistakes and miscalculations that led to the crisis, attention should now be directed toward the future. The intervention carries particular weight given Oman's longstanding role as a discreet interlocutor between Iran and Western governments, having previously hosted the backchannel talks that helped lay the groundwork for the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement.

Freedom of Navigation Through the Strait of Hormuz

One priority stands above all others, he writes. Complex discussions are currently underway to establish a lasting framework guaranteeing freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. As one of only two states whose territorial waters border this strategic waterway — Iran being the other — Oman bears a particular responsibility. Al-Busaidi emphasizes that Oman must work alongside Iran and the wider international community, which depends heavily on this maritime passage, to develop a realistic, sustainable, and internationally lawful framework that permanently safeguards navigation rights.

The success of these consultations is essential to the global economy, he notes, as free passage through the Strait of Hormuz remains a cornerstone of international trade. The chokepoint handles roughly one-fifth of the world's daily oil consumption, making any disruption an immediate concern for energy markets worldwide. Al-Busaidi also acknowledges the particularly constructive role played by France during these discussions. However, he cautions that the urgency of this issue must not preclude a broader strategic perspective, as the Strait of Hormuz represents only one element of a much wider landscape requiring careful reflection.

Vital Interests to Defend

Since 1979, security in the Gulf has largely been organized around what became known as the policy of "containment." This doctrine, based primarily on exclusion, assumed that the principal objective of the region's security architecture was to protect the Arab Gulf — and the Western interests associated with it — from an existential threat supposedly posed by Iran. It underpinned a decades-long expansion of the American military footprint across the Gulf, including major installations in Qatar, Bahrain — home to the U.S. Fifth Fleet — Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates.

That assumption, Al-Busaidi writes, was fundamentally mistaken. Tehran did not constitute an existential threat. The enormous military expenditures throughout the region, the expansion of American military bases across the Gulf, and the maintenance of a long-range military protection presence were all developed and sustained at tremendous cost, yet without providing genuine strategic value.

The war against Iran, he concludes, revealed just how much the policy of containment was a myth.