New Delhi: US President Donald Trump may be willing to abandon the pursuit of a formal new nuclear agreement with Iran if Tehran agrees to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal cited by NDTV. The reported shift could mark a significant change in Washington’s approach to the conflict, with the strategic waterway potentially becoming the immediate priority over securing a comprehensive nuclear settlement.
The report, citing US officials, says Trump has spent weeks preparing for such an outcome and has privately indicated to senior aides that he could walk away without obtaining a fresh nuclear agreement with Tehran. Instead, the restoration of commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz could form the basis for ending the current US military campaign and extending an existing ceasefire.
The development comes as the Strait of Hormuz remains at the centre of the confrontation between Washington and Tehran. The narrow waterway between Iran and Oman has become one of Iran’s strongest sources of leverage, while the disruption to shipping has created wider concerns for global energy markets.
Trump could prioritise reopening Strait of Hormuz
According to the report, the Trump administration may be prepared to accept the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz as a sufficient basis for moving towards an end to the military campaign, even without securing a new formal nuclear agreement.
This would represent a major change in emphasis.
The US campaign against Iran was closely associated with concerns about Tehran’s nuclear programme. However, the conflict has also produced a major maritime crisis, with commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz disrupted.
For Washington, restoring shipping could offer an immediate and visible outcome from the conflict.
For Trump, such an outcome could also provide a way to demonstrate that the military campaign had delivered a tangible result, particularly as economic and political pressure grows in the United States.
The Wall Street Journal report suggests that the administration may therefore be weighing a practical arrangement over a more ambitious nuclear settlement.
Iran has a long list of demands
The biggest obstacle remains Iran’s conditions for reopening the waterway.
According to the report, Tehran has demanded several concessions, including billions of dollars in payments, an end to the US naval blockade, the withdrawal of American forces from the region, the lifting of sanctions and the release of frozen Iranian assets.
These demands go well beyond the simple reopening of a shipping route.
They touch on military deployments, economic sanctions, frozen financial resources and the broader US-Iran relationship.
Accepting all or even some of these conditions could therefore have significant political consequences for Washington.
Iran’s negotiating position also reflects the leverage it has gained from the disruption of shipping through Hormuz.
The longer the waterway remains restricted, the greater the pressure on countries and companies dependent on the route.
Why the Strait of Hormuz matters
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints.
Located between Iran and Oman, the waterway connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and provides a crucial route for international oil and gas shipments.
Any prolonged disruption can therefore affect energy prices, shipping costs and supply expectations across global markets.
The current crisis has made the strategic importance of the strait even more apparent.
Iran has used its control over the waterway as leverage, while the US has sought to challenge restrictions on commercial shipping.
According to NDTV’s report, Iran has insisted that American warships and allied vessels should not be allowed to pass through the strait and has also sought payments from commercial vessels using the route. Washington has rejected both the restrictions and the proposed toll arrangements.
Trump’s nuclear strategy could be changing
The possibility of abandoning the pursuit of a new nuclear agreement is particularly significant because Iran’s nuclear programme has been central to the conflict.
A formal nuclear agreement would potentially impose restrictions and verification requirements on Iran’s nuclear activities.
However, negotiating such an agreement could take considerably longer than reaching a temporary arrangement on maritime traffic.
The reported US approach appears to recognise that distinction.
Rather than seeking a comprehensive settlement immediately, Washington could focus on achieving one concrete objective — restoring commercial shipping through Hormuz — and use that as the foundation for a longer-term ceasefire.
The strategy could reduce the immediate pressure created by the shipping disruption, while leaving the more difficult nuclear question for future negotiations.
Iran may have gained negotiating leverage
The crisis has demonstrated how strategically important the Strait of Hormuz is to both Iran and the global economy.
By restricting shipping, Tehran has been able to create pressure well beyond the immediate conflict zone.
The effects have been felt by commercial operators and energy markets, while governments have had to consider the consequences of prolonged disruption.
This has strengthened Iran’s negotiating position.
The report notes that the strait has become one of Tehran’s most powerful sources of leverage.
Iran can therefore potentially use the reopening of the waterway as a bargaining chip.
The challenge for Washington is deciding how many concessions it is willing to make in exchange for restoring normal shipping.
The US has already faced pressure over Hormuz
The reported shift comes after repeated claims from Trump that the Strait of Hormuz was already open.
According to NDTV, those claims have repeatedly proved premature.
The continuing disruption means that the practical reality remains different from political statements.
For international shipping companies, the key question is not whether the waterway is declared open but whether vessels can safely and reliably use it.
A durable reopening would therefore require more than a political announcement.
Shipping operators would need clarity about routes, security arrangements, restrictions, insurance and the status of military vessels.
Ceasefire could be extended through a Hormuz deal
The restoration of shipping could potentially become the basis for extending the current ceasefire, according to the report.
This would create a relatively narrow objective for negotiations.
Instead of attempting to resolve every dispute between Washington and Tehran at once, the two sides could first focus on establishing a workable maritime arrangement.
If successful, that could provide time for discussions over the nuclear programme, sanctions and other outstanding issues.
Such an approach could also reduce the risk of an immediate return to large-scale military confrontation.
However, much would depend on whether Iran believes that reopening the waterway without a comprehensive agreement would leave it exposed to future US pressure.
Billions of dollars could become part of negotiations
One of Iran’s reported demands involves billions of dollars in payments.
Such a demand would make the negotiations particularly complicated for the US administration.
Any major financial concession would likely face scrutiny in Washington, especially if it were perceived as a payment for reopening an international shipping route.
Iran has also sought the release of frozen assets.
Together with sanctions relief, these demands could provide Tehran with substantial economic benefits.
For Iran, the financial component may be as important as the maritime issue itself because the country has faced extensive economic pressure.
For Washington, however, agreeing to such measures could be politically difficult.
Withdrawal of US forces is another major issue
Iran has also reportedly demanded the withdrawal of American forces from the region.
This is a much broader security issue than the Strait of Hormuz itself.
The US maintains military assets across the Middle East, partly to protect its interests and those of its allies.
A significant withdrawal could therefore alter the regional security balance.
It could also affect the ability of Washington to respond quickly to future threats.
Iran’s demand reflects its broader objective of reducing the US military presence around its territory.
Whether Washington would accept such a condition remains a major question.
Sanctions relief could be another bargaining point
The lifting of sanctions is another key Iranian demand.
US sanctions have played a major role in limiting Iran’s access to international financial markets and affecting its economy.
If sanctions relief became part of a Hormuz agreement, the deal could have economic consequences far beyond shipping.
For Iran, sanctions relief could provide access to additional revenue and international transactions.
For the US, however, lifting sanctions without securing nuclear restrictions could attract criticism from those who argue that economic concessions should be linked to verifiable limits on Iran’s nuclear activities.
This is one reason why the reported possibility of abandoning a formal nuclear deal is so significant.
The nuclear issue would remain unresolved
Even if Trump accepted a Hormuz-based arrangement, Iran’s nuclear programme would not disappear as an issue.
A decision to walk away from a new nuclear agreement would leave the two countries with fewer formal mechanisms for addressing Tehran’s nuclear activities.
Questions about enrichment, inspections and verification could therefore return later.
The reported strategy may postpone the nuclear dispute rather than resolve it.
That could create a temporary reduction in tensions while leaving the most difficult strategic disagreement unresolved.
For Washington, the benefit would be an immediate reopening of the shipping route.
For Tehran, the benefit could be economic and political concessions without signing a new comprehensive nuclear agreement.
Global oil markets are closely watching
The Strait of Hormuz is particularly important because of its role in global energy trade.
Any prolonged disruption can increase concerns about supply availability and contribute to higher energy costs.
NDTV reported that petrol prices in the US remained substantially higher than before the conflict began in late February.
The effects could extend to countries far from the Gulf.
India, which imports a substantial portion of its crude oil requirements, has a direct interest in stable maritime routes and predictable energy prices.
Higher international oil prices can increase India’s import bill and place pressure on inflation, transport costs and household expenses.
A sustained reopening of Hormuz could therefore have implications for India’s economy as well.
Trump faces domestic political pressure
The US President also has domestic political considerations.
According to the report, the US midterm elections are less than three months away, increasing pressure on Trump to demonstrate that the military campaign achieved meaningful objectives.
An agreement that restores shipping through Hormuz could give the administration a clear outcome to present to American voters.
However, abandoning the pursuit of a nuclear agreement could also attract criticism from those who believe the original strategic objective was to prevent Iran from advancing its nuclear capabilities.
Trump would therefore need to balance competing political narratives.
He could argue that restoring global shipping represents a practical success, while opponents could question why the US entered the conflict if the nuclear issue remains unresolved.
Washington has fewer options
The report suggests that Iran’s demands have left Washington with fewer diplomatic options.
The US has to weigh the economic costs of continued disruption against the political costs of making concessions.
Maintaining military pressure could prolong the conflict and increase risks to American forces and regional allies.
Accepting Iran’s conditions could produce a diplomatic settlement but may be portrayed as a concession to Tehran.
The possibility of a compromise focused primarily on Hormuz could therefore represent an attempt to find a middle path.
What Iran could gain from reopening Hormuz
Iran could also benefit from a negotiated reopening.
If the agreement included sanctions relief, financial payments or the release of frozen assets, Tehran could gain significant economic breathing space.
A reopening could also reduce the likelihood of continued military confrontation.
At the same time, Iran would need to calculate whether giving up its leverage over Hormuz would weaken its position in future negotiations.
This makes the timing of any reopening crucial.
Tehran may seek guarantees that concessions made now will not simply be followed by renewed US pressure later.
What happens if no deal is reached?
If Washington and Tehran fail to agree, the uncertainty around Hormuz could continue.
That would create additional pressure on commercial shipping and energy markets.
A prolonged confrontation could also increase the risk of further military incidents involving US forces, Iranian forces and commercial vessels.
For regional countries, continued instability could create additional security and economic challenges.
The longer the situation remains unresolved, the greater the incentive for both sides to find at least a temporary arrangement.
Oman remains strategically important
Oman could play an important role in any future arrangement because the country shares control of the waters surrounding the Strait of Hormuz with Iran.
Oman has also historically served as a diplomatic channel between Iran and the United States.
Its geographical position and diplomatic relationships make it particularly relevant to any effort to restore maritime traffic.
A future agreement could therefore involve Oman as a mediator or participant in establishing practical arrangements for shipping.
India has a direct stake in the outcome
For India, developments around the Strait of Hormuz are not merely a distant geopolitical issue.
The region is important to India’s energy security, trade routes and large Indian diaspora in Gulf countries.
Any disruption to oil supplies or shipping routes could affect India’s import costs.
If the waterway is fully reopened and commercial traffic normalises, it could reduce some of the uncertainty surrounding energy supplies.
However, the longer-term stability of the region would remain important because a temporary reopening would not eliminate the possibility of renewed disruption.
A possible shift from nuclear deal to maritime deal
The most significant aspect of the report is therefore the possibility that Washington could change its immediate objective.
Instead of insisting that Iran agree to a formal nuclear settlement before the conflict can end, Trump could accept the reopening of Hormuz as the basis for an agreement.
Such a move would prioritise an immediate strategic and economic concern over a comprehensive long-term nuclear settlement.
It would also acknowledge the leverage Iran has gained from the waterway.
Whether this approach can produce a lasting peace remains uncertain.
A maritime agreement could reduce tensions, but the underlying disagreements over Iran’s nuclear programme, sanctions and the US military presence would remain.
Conclusion
The possibility that Donald Trump could abandon the pursuit of a formal new nuclear agreement with Iran in exchange for the full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz marks a potentially significant development in the US-Iran conflict.
According to The Wall Street Journal, cited by NDTV, Trump has privately indicated that he could walk away without securing a new nuclear agreement if Tehran restores shipping through the strategic waterway.
Iran, however, has reportedly attached a long list of conditions to reopening Hormuz, including billions of dollars in payments, the end of the US naval blockade, withdrawal of American forces, sanctions relief and the release of frozen assets.
The situation leaves both sides facing difficult choices. Washington wants the waterway reopened and needs to demonstrate tangible results from the conflict, while Tehran has used the strait as a powerful source of leverage.
For global markets — and countries such as India that depend heavily on Gulf energy supplies — a stable reopening would be significant. But unless the broader disputes between Iran and the US are addressed, a Hormuz agreement could prove to be only a temporary step towards a larger diplomatic settlement.