MADRID – After a series of exchanges, Tehran finally responded to the letter from the President of the United States.

In this context, Abbas Araghchi announced that "the official response of the Islamic Republic of Iran was sent to the U.S. side through Oman on Wednesday, March 26, 2025." The Iranian Foreign Minister emphasized that "this letter contains a detailed explanation of Iran's official positions regarding the current developments and a precise response to the points raised by President Trump, which were duly communicated to the opposing side."

What surprised all experts was that Iran chose to send its response to Donald Trump's letter via Oman, rather than through the United Arab Emirates, who had been responsible for transmitting the U.S. President's message to Iran. 

Previously, a delegation from the UAE, led by Anwar Gargash, advisor to the President of the UAE, traveled to Tehran to deliver the U.S. President's letter to Iran. The letter had been sent by Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy to the Middle East [West Asia], to Mohammed bin Zayed, the President of the UAE, who handed it over to the Emiratis to deliver it to Iran.

The choice of Oman as the channel to transmit the response is no coincidence. In fact, by opting for this route, Iran sends a clear message that the Muscat route can be a key part of the negotiation process. This move not only underscores Iran's seriousness regarding the negotiations, but also highlights the priority Iran places on diplomacy through Oman, a key player in regional relations.

The choice of Oman as a mediator is the result of years of privileged bilateral contacts. Oman has historically been the country closest to Iran's positions in the Gulf, playing a key and constructive role in mediating several issues related to the Islamic Republic of Iran. 

Over the years, the good relations between Oman and Iran have not been affected, even after the Islamic Revolution. Unlike other Persian Gulf countries that feared the Iranian government and supported Saddam Hussein's regime, the Omani government adopted a neutral stance during the Iran-Iraq war. In fact, Oman played a key role in mediating a peace agreement between the two countries, helping to end the conflict. Despite regional tensions, the two countries have maintained close relations, openly displaying their cooperation and mutual understanding in an environment marked by uncertainty and divisions in the region.

In this regard, the recent statements by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi can be understood, as he stated that "Oman has played this same role in the past. Both in the nuclear agreement negotiations and in interactions during the last years of Martyr Raisi's government, Oman has been a mediator." According to the Iranian diplomat, "We have a good experience with Oman. We trust Oman's goodwill, and there is a strong relationship between our two countries. The relations between our two countries are based on mutual understanding. Therefore, the choice of Oman was a completely natural choice."

As a sign of its distinctiveness, Oman declared that it would not be part of the Persian Gulf Union project but would not hinder efforts toward the unification of other Persian Gulf countries. This stance reflects its unique foreign policy, characterized by caution and pragmatism. Oman's reluctance stems from several factors, including its sectarian differences, concerns about losing sovereignty, and its tradition of maintaining a neutral stance on regional issues. 

Moreover, Oman refused to join the Saudi-led coalition against the Resistance group Ansarullah in Yemen. Additionally, Oman avoids becoming involved in conflicts like the one in Yemen due to its geographical proximity and tribal ties with the neighboring country, fearing that instability and conflicts might spill over into its own territory. Nevertheless, Oman has continued to play a mediating role in efforts to resolve the conflict and has sought to maintain its neutrality in the region.

Another clear example of Oman's independent foreign policy was evident in January 2016, when the country did not withdraw its ambassador from Iran following the incidents in the Saudi embassy in Tehran. Unlike other GCC members, who responded more aggressively, Oman maintained its diplomatic openness, although it condemned the attack on embassies as a violation of international agreements. This attitude reflects Oman's strategic stance: balancing its relationships with regional powers, without relinquishing its diplomatic independence and without antagonizing its neighbors or Iran.

This privileged relationship with Oman, built over several decades, contrasts with the distrust that exists between Iran and the United Arab Emirates due to Abu Dhabi's relations with Israel.

In 2020, the United Arab Emirates normalized its relations with Israel. Along with Bahrain, they became the first Arab states to establish formal diplomatic ties with the regime since Egypt and Jordan signed peace treaties with Israel in 1979 and 1994, respectively. The Abraham Accords, as the 2020 normalization agreement is known, positioned the UAE as a close partner of Israel.

Since October 7, the image of the United Arab Emirates has experienced a significant deterioration across the region. A survey conducted in January 2024 by the Arab Center Washington DC revealed that 67% of respondents from sixteen Arab countries considered the UAE's stance on the Gaza war to be bad or very bad. This growing anti-UAE sentiment poses serious challenges for a state that is highly concerned with its international image. The Emirati government is particularly worried about reports of harassment and verbal attacks directed at Emirati citizens when they travel to other parts of West Asia due to the UAE's relationship with Israel.

In addition to the regional backlash, there is also internal frustration regarding the normalization agreements with Israel. Prominent Emiratis who once supported normalization with the Zionist regime now express disillusionment. "Israel has embarrassed the signatories [of the accords]. Netanyahu didn't freeze the settlements as he had promised. Israel simply doesn't care, and now there's a public reaction," explained an Emirati analyst specializing in regional politics. Internal disappointment and growing unrest in the region signal the tensions the UAE faces as it navigates both internal challenges and the repercussions of its alignment with Israel.

Therefore, the choice of the Omani route can largely be understood by this combination of confidence in Muscat's policy, demonstrated over decades, and the distrust toward the UAE and its political and military rapprochement with Israel.