Oman Rejects trump’s "Peace Council": Muscat Warns of Regional re-engineering
WAR MONITOR | Strategic Brief
Date: March 12, 2026
Published by: The Observer | Al-Muraqeb [www.al-muraqeb.com](https://www.google.com/search?q=http://www.al-muraqeb.com) Telegram: Arabic: English:
THE NEWS
Omani Foreign Minister Badr Al-Busaidi has issued a high-level diplomatic rebuff to the Trump administration’s regional agenda. Speaking in the wake of the joint U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran (Operations Epic Fury and Roaring Lion), Al-Busaidi confirmed that Oman will not join the "Board of Peace" chaired by Donald Trump and maintains a strict refusal to normalize relations with Israel. Muscat’s top diplomat characterized the current war as a calculated attempt to forcibly re-engineer the Middle East, warning that global energy markets will face severe shocks as oil prices rise and supply chains destabilize.
Background
Oman has historically functioned as the primary diplomatic "backchannel" between Tehran and Washington. Before the outbreak of hostilities on February 28, 2026, Muscat was mediating a nuclear breakthrough that reportedly involved Iran agreeing to zero uranium stockpiling. The collapse of these talks into a direct kinetic conflict—marked by the assassination of the Iranian Supreme Leader—has effectively dismantled the "Omani Model" of neutral mediation. This development follows the June 2025 short-term escalation, signaling a transition from containment to active regime-change efforts by the U.S. and Israel.
Latest Developments
• Diplomatic Stalemate: Despite Omani claims that a deal was "within reach" in Geneva, the U.S. State Department under Marco Rubio maintains the strikes were a pre-emptive necessity.
• Military Retaliation: Iran has responded with missile strikes against regional hubs hosting U.S. assets, including targets in the UAE, Qatar, and Bahrain.
• Economic Fallout: Brent crude remains volatile as Iran threatens the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a move that Al-Busaidi warns will force the global economy to "pay the price."
• Security Shift: Al-Busaidi has called for an urgent "re-evaluation of the Gulf defense philosophy," questioning the efficacy of existing Western-aligned security arrangements that have failed to prevent regional conflagration.
Geopolitical Analysis
The Omani position reveals a deepening rift within the GCC. Muscat views the U.S.-Israeli offensive not as a counter-proliferation measure, but as a strategic dismantling of Iranian sovereignty to facilitate a new regional order centered on the Abraham Accords. 1. Strategic Autonomy: By rejecting the "Peace Council," Oman is signaling that it will not trade its role as an independent mediator for a seat in a U.S.-led bloc. 2. Defense Realignment: The call to reconsider Gulf defense philosophy suggests Muscat may seek a more inclusive regional security architecture that includes Iran, rather than one designed to exclude it. 3. Economic Weaponization: Muscat’s focus on supply chains and oil prices highlights the vulnerability of the global "energy corridor" to prolonged kinetic warfare in the Persian Gulf.
Axis of Resistance Perspective
Tehran and its allies—specifically Hezbollah and Yemeni factions—likely view Oman's stance as a critical diplomatic validation. From their perspective, Al-Busaidi’s comments confirm that the U.S. objective is regional hegemony rather than security. This narrative bolsters the "Resistance" argument that diplomatic "off-ramps" were intentionally sabotaged by Washington. Expect these factions to use Oman’s rhetoric to frame their retaliatory strikes as a defense of regional sovereignty against "foreign re-engineering."
Future Outlook
• Mediation Vacuum: With Oman’s traditional role compromised, the region lacks a "safety valve" for de-escalation, increasing the risk of miscalculation.
• GCC Fragmentation:** Disagreements over the "Trump Peace Plan" and the war’s utility may lead to a more fragmented Gulf policy between hawks (who favor the strikes) and traditionalists (like Oman and Kuwait).