Rizky Amelia
Iran has used the United Nations General Assembly as the stage for a fresh diplomatic push, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi presenting a proposal that would see the Strait of Hormuz reopened within seven days provided Washington meets a set of Iranian conditions. The offer, unveiled in New York after nearly seven months of conflict between Tehran and the United States, marks the most concrete public attempt yet to halt the fighting and restore commercial traffic through one of the world's most critical energy chokepoints.
On its surface, the plan reads as a de-escalation blueprint. Araghchi has called for a seven-day cessation of hostilities across the region, including in Lebanon, alongside the release of at least $12 billion in frozen Iranian assets, the lifting of sanctions on Iranian oil exports, and an end to the US naval blockade. In exchange, the strait would reopen through a new route whose path would be determined jointly by Iran and Oman, rather than reverting to the shipping arrangements that existed before the war.
That final provision carries significant weight. According to the source article, Tehran is not seeking a simple return to the pre-war status quo but rather the establishment of a new maritime reality in which international shipping becomes conditional on an arrangement that Iran itself helps to define. Iran already requires vessels to obtain prior authorisation before transiting the strait, and ships that refuse have been targeted. By securing Chinese backing for the proposal and support from Oman, Tehran appears to be constructing a regional political framework that would entrench these new rules and make them far harder to dismantle later.
The timing of the offer appears deliberate. Iran has made little secret of the fact that it is monitoring the American political calendar, signalling a preference for an agreement before the November midterm elections, when rising energy prices are squeezing both US consumers and the White House. The calculation is straightforward: as election day approaches, the cost to Washington of keeping the strait closed continues to climb, making an Iranian solution most valuable precisely at this moment. I
The most contentious element of the package, however, concerns Yemen. Hossein Mohebbi, an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokesperson who oversees Iran's Yemen portfolio, told the AFP news agency that ending hostilities in Yemen ranks among Tehran's demands. That condition was announced by the IRGC and may not appear in the formal plan Araghchi presented, leaving it unclear whether the written proposal formally incorporates the renewed conflict in Yemen.
This gap should not be mistaken for incoherence. It reflects a long-standing division of labour within Iranian policymaking, in which one faction publicly raises the ceiling of demands while another keeps the negotiating document flexible enough to permit both advances and retreats. The arrangement gives Tehran room to test American and international reactions without locking itself into positions it cannot later abandon.
Some accounts go further still. Reports cited in the source material suggest that one day before unveiling the seven-day plan, Araghchi handed US envoys a written document outlining a roadmap for a region-wide ceasefire lasting up to 60 days, coupled with a gradual reopening of the strait and an end to the US naval blockade. According to published descriptions, Tehran is demanding the release of approximately $24 billion in frozen Iranian funds and a halt to enforcement of the blockade imposed on the Houthis as preconditions for any comprehensive settlement.
If those reports hold up, Iran would have presented two documents within two days: one offering a rapid arrangement for Hormuz and another setting out a broader framework that explicitly folds Yemen into the bargain. Such a dual-track approach would allow Tehran to offer the international community an apparent immediate escape from the energy crisis while reserving its real price for the wider agreement.
The 60-day track is believed to refer not to a new Iranian document but to the framework of the memorandum of understanding signed remotely by President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on June 17. That memorandum was intended to consolidate the ceasefire and produce a final agreement within two months, but Washington now signals that it considers the understanding to have run its course, with Trump declaring the ceasefire over and his administration treating the memorandum as an agreement Iran violated.
Araghchi, by contrast, is publicly urging a return to the June understanding and has welcomed Chinese efforts to revive it. If the seven-day plan serves chiefly as an entry point for restarting the 60-day process, then Trump's refusal to lift the blockade amounts to a rejection of the entire track at this stage, even without a formal repudiation of any specific document. It is worth noting that no open source appears to have confirmed the existence of a separate written document from Araghchi containing a 60-day regional roadmap, meaning the claim could stem from an unpublished leak or from media confusion.
Washington's position remains firm. The administration has said it will not return to the terms of the June memorandum, and one official indicated that the US is in no hurry to negotiate given its advantage in the strait. The Wall Street Journal has also reported that Trump rejected an Iranian offer conveyed through intermediaries under which Iran would have reopened the Strait of Hormuz. Taken together, these signals suggest that while Tehran has placed a carefully constructed proposal on the table, the diplomatic impasse over the waterway, and over Yemen, remains unresolved.
Comments (0)