ANKARA – Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has warned that while the United States and Iran may be sincere in their pursuit of a ceasefire, the interests of Israel remain a primary obstacle to a stable regional settlement.
The diplomatic tension comes as the Middle East teeters on the edge of a broader conflict, with global energy markets volatile following Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The intersection of a potential US-Iran rapprochement and Israel’s military objectives in Lebanon has created a precarious geopolitical deadlock that threatens to neutralize any temporary diplomatic gains.
The Hormuz Chokepoint and Diplomatic Pressure
The primary catalyst for the current negotiations is the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most critical oil transit chokepoint. By blocking the passage, Tehran has exerted maximum leverage over the global economy, specifically impacting Asian markets and Western energy security.
Fidan noted that the economic pressure is now acting as a forcing function for both Washington and Tehran, which are also under pressure from their own legislatures and allies to avoid a prolonged disruption of maritime trade governed by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
“Both sides are under pressure to open the Strait of Hormuz. They have different reasons, but it’s the same desire, same objective. So that compels them to really reach a deal,” said Fidan on Tuesday.
The Strait of Hormuz is the only sea passage from the Persian Gulf to the open ocean, through which approximately one-fifth of the world’s total oil consumption passes daily. Any prolonged closure risks a systemic global price shock and disrupts the flow of liquefied natural gas (LNG), particularly from Qatar, undermining energy-security planning in Asia and Europe and complicating efforts by the International Energy Agency and national regulators to stabilize markets.
Regional diplomats say the crisis is testing existing US security commitments to Gulf partners and the credibility of international maritime security mechanisms such as the Combined Maritime Forces task force, which has previously coordinated patrols to protect commercial shipping in the Gulf and adjacent waters.
The Israeli Variable in Lebanon
Despite the narrow alignment between the US and Iran on reopening shipping lanes, Fidan argues that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government operates on a different strategic calculus. According to the Turkish minister, Israeli military maneuvers in Lebanon are fundamentally at odds with a regional ceasefire and risk widening the conflict beyond Gaza and the Gulf.
Fidan cited intelligence shared between Iranian and Turkish officials regarding Israeli troop movements in Lebanon, describing the current situation as “not tolerable” for regional security.
“What Israel is doing in Lebanon is clearly in violation of our understanding, so we can expect such things from Netanyahu’s government,” Fidan added, without specifying the nature of that understanding or whether it was codified in any formal communication.
The friction highlights the complex nature of the current escalation:
- February 28 Strikes: A coordinated wave of US and Israeli strikes targeted Iranian cities, signaling an expansion of the confrontation beyond proxy theaters.
- Iranian Retaliation: Tehran responded with missile attacks against Israel and several US-allied Gulf states hosting American military bases, underscoring the vulnerability of host nations that anchor US regional posture.
- Border Vulnerabilities: Türkiye, which shares a 560km land border with Iran, has intensified its criticism of Israeli operations to prevent a wider regional contagion that could spill over its own frontiers and force Ankara into difficult security and refugee-policy decisions.
Fidan’s remarks also reflect Türkiye’s effort to position itself as a mediator capable of speaking to both Western capitals and Tehran while insisting that Israeli actions in Lebanon be brought under tighter international scrutiny.
The Standoff in Washington and Tehran
The diplomatic atmosphere remains contradictory. US President Donald Trump stated on Monday that negotiations with Iran are moving at a “rapid pace,” suggesting a breakthrough may be imminent. However, the reality on the ground remains one of deep-seated mistrust and tactical brinkmanship, with both sides trading public accusations even as envoys work through intermediaries.
Tehran continues to use the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz as its primary bargaining chip, threatening to activate further pressure points across the region if its terms are not met. For Washington, any concession on sanctions or security guarantees carries domestic political risks in an election year, adding another layer of complexity to the talks.
According to reports from the state-affiliated Mehr News Agency, Iranian officials are currently reviewing a proposed final text for a temporary deal. The agency described Tehran’s approach as “stern,” citing a historical pattern of US non-compliance with previous agreements-a reference to the legacy of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and subsequent US withdrawals, which have hardened Iranian skepticism about the durability of any new understanding.
The current impasse follows weeks of indirect talks and air strikes that have failed to yield a permanent cessation of hostilities. Diplomats say negotiators are attempting to sequence limited confidence-building steps – such as phased reopening of shipping lanes and monitored de-escalation around key border areas – but remain divided over verification and enforcement mechanisms.
The proposed agreement remains under review by Tehran, with no official response yet delivered to the US regarding the final text of the temporary ceasefire. Regional capitals are watching closely, amid concern that any collapse of the talks could trigger a sharper military confrontation and further destabilize global energy supplies.