UAE supports Oman role in US–Iran talks

The United Arab Emirates has publicly welcomed Oman’s facilitation of dialogue between the United States and Iran, signalling Gulf backing for a diplomatic channel that aims to temper regional tensions and keep communication lines open between two long-standing adversaries. Emirati officials said Muscat’s engagement reflects the value of regional actors using discretion and trust to complement broader international efforts, especially at a time when the Middle East is navigating overlapping security and economic pressures.

Officials familiar with the discussions said the talks hosted by Oman are exploratory in nature and designed to test areas of overlap rather than to deliver immediate agreements. The UAE’s position frames the Omani channel as a stabilising mechanism that reduces the risk of miscalculation while allowing parallel diplomatic tracks led by global powers to continue. Abu Dhabi has emphasised that sustained dialogue, even when progress is incremental, can help contain escalation and preserve space for negotiated outcomes.

Oman’s role draws on a track record of mediation that includes facilitating contacts during earlier phases of US–Iran engagement and serving as a discreet conduit during periods of heightened tension. Gulf diplomats note that Muscat’s neutrality and consistent foreign policy have enabled it to host sensitive exchanges without publicity, a feature the UAE views as essential to confidence-building. The emphasis on quiet diplomacy aligns with Abu Dhabi’s broader approach of de-escalation and economic pragmatism across the region.

The talks come against a complex backdrop. The Iran nuclear file remains unresolved, with negotiations over constraints and verification stalled amid disagreements over sanctions relief and compliance sequencing. At the same time, maritime security incidents, proxy conflicts and rhetoric around deterrence continue to test regional stability. By endorsing Oman’s efforts, the UAE is underscoring a preference for managed competition and risk reduction rather than confrontation.

Emirati officials have stressed that regional voices can add practical insights often missing from larger multilateral formats. Proximity to the consequences of escalation, they argue, gives Gulf states a strong incentive to support dialogue that lowers tensions and safeguards trade routes and energy infrastructure. The UAE’s economy, like those of its neighbours, depends on predictable shipping lanes and investor confidence, making diplomacy a strategic necessity rather than an abstract ideal.

Analysts say the Omani channel offers flexibility that formal negotiations sometimes lack. It allows technical issues to be explored informally, clarifies red lines and tests political will without locking parties into rigid positions. While expectations are calibrated, even limited understandings on communication protocols or humanitarian matters can reduce friction. The UAE’s endorsement reflects an assessment that such incremental gains are worthwhile.

The United States has maintained that diplomacy remains the preferred path to address concerns about Iran’s nuclear activities while safeguarding regional security. Iran, for its part, has signalled openness to engagement that respects its interests and delivers tangible economic benefits. The Omani talks provide a venue where these positions can be aired away from domestic political pressures, a factor regional diplomats consider critical to candour.

Within the Gulf, the UAE’s stance also mirrors a wider recalibration that prioritises economic integration and conflict management. Abu Dhabi has expanded trade and investment ties across Asia, Africa and the Middle East, while advocating dialogue with neighbours to resolve disputes. Supporting Oman’s mediation fits this pattern, reinforcing the idea that stability underpins growth and diversification agendas.

There are, however, constraints. Skepticism persists in Washington and Tehran over the durability of any understandings reached outside comprehensive agreements. Hard-line constituencies on both sides question the value of incremental steps absent firm commitments. Regional actors are aware that progress can be uneven and vulnerable to external shocks, including developments in other theatres that spill over into Gulf security.