By: Ebenezer Adu-Gyamfi / Emmanuel Ayiku For GhanaianNewsCanada | May 24, 2026 | Washington / Tel Aviv / Riyadh / Toronto
WASHINGTON / TORONTO — President Donald Trump declared on Saturday that a peace deal with Iran to end the ongoing war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz has been “largely negotiated” and would be announced shortly — a statement that sent ripples of cautious optimism and deep anxiety simultaneously through capitals across the Middle East. By Sunday, Trump had already walked back the urgency, saying he had told his negotiators “not to rush into a deal” because “time is on our side.” The Strait of Hormuz blockade, he confirmed, would remain in full force until any agreement is fully signed and certified.
The whiplash was characteristic of Trump’s dealmaking style — but behind the erratic public statements lies a genuinely complex diplomatic picture. As the US and Iran edge toward a potential agreement, America’s most important regional allies are confronting an uncomfortable reality: a deal that ends the war and reopens global oil flows may serve American and Iranian interests without fully serving theirs.
Where Negotiations Stand Right Now
The US-Iran conflict began on February 28, 2026, when the United States joined Israel in military strikes on Iran. A fragile ceasefire has since held with interruptions — drones have continued to launch from Iraqi territory toward Gulf countries, and the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked, choking approximately 20% of the world’s oil supply and driving US inflation to its highest levels in years.
Pakistan has been playing the role of chief intermediary — conveying proposals between Washington and Tehran. On Saturday, Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir travelled to Tehran personally, meeting Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi as part of the ongoing shuttle diplomacy. Trump confirmed he held phone calls with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu — all focused on finalising terms.
The core US demand remains: Iran must surrender its enriched uranium, permanently give up nuclear weapons capacity, and allow the dismantlement of its Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan nuclear sites — all bombed by the US after it joined Israel’s war last year. Iran’s foreign ministry acknowledged the two sides remain simultaneously “very far and very close” to a deal — a phrase that perfectly captures the tortured state of these negotiations.
Israel’s Fear: A ‘Bad Deal’ That Leaves Iran Standing
Of all America’s regional allies, Israel has the most visceral stake in the outcome. Israeli officials have told CNN that their primary fear is that Trump will strike an agreement before addressing the core issues that drove both countries to launch the war in the first place — specifically, Iran’s nuclear capability and its support for proxy forces across Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen.
The particular alarm is over the reported discussion of a “sunset clause” — a provision that would allow some restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities to expire after a set number of years, at which point Iran could resume limited enrichment. This is almost identical to the structure of the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal that both Netanyahu and Trump spent years denouncing as fatally flawed. The prospect of negotiating a new deal with the same structural weakness is, for Israel, deeply troubling.
A senior Israeli official put it bluntly: “The emerging agreement is bad because it signals to the Iranians that they possess a weapon no less effective than a nuclear one — and that is the Strait of Hormuz.” The message was clear: if Iran learns that blocking a global oil chokepoint forces the world to negotiate, it will do it again. Netanyahu, for his part, said Trump had personally assured him that Iran’s nuclear programme would be “fully dismantled” — but Israeli officials remain sceptical that the final text will deliver on that assurance.
Saudi Arabia and the Gulf: Economic Relief vs Security Risk
For Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Bahrain, the calculation is more nuanced. The Strait of Hormuz blockade has disrupted Gulf oil exports and created economic turbulence across the region. A deal that reopens the waterway and ends the risk of further military escalation has genuine appeal. Gulf states are exhausted by instability and acutely aware that a wider conflict risks destabilising their own security.
But Gulf leaders share Israel’s concern about a deal that leaves Iran economically rehabilitated and militarily emboldened without definitively resolving the nuclear question or curtailing its regional influence. Saudi Arabia and Iran have been rivals for regional dominance for decades — a rivalry fought through proxy conflicts in Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria. A deal that restores Iranian oil revenues and lifts economic pressure without dismantling Tehran’s regional network would, from Riyadh’s perspective, hand Iran a strategic victory.
The Gulf states are also watching Trump’s broader Middle East agenda uneasily. During his recent Gulf tour, Trump secured massive economic commitments — Saudi Arabia’s $142 billion defence package, Qatar Airways’ $96 billion Boeing order, the UAE’s $1.4 trillion investment pledge — but Israeli observers noted that the trip and its accompanying diplomatic processes appeared to sideline Israel’s interests in favour of Gulf economic priorities. For America’s allies across the region, the question is whether Trump’s dealmaking serves a coherent regional security vision, or simply chases the best available headline.
Iran’s Position: ‘Very Far and Very Close’
Tehran’s own public posture on the negotiations has been deliberately ambiguous. Iran’s foreign ministry acknowledged the proximity and distance of a deal in the same breath — a negotiating tactic designed to maintain leverage without foreclosing the possibility of agreement. Iranian state media pointedly contradicted Trump’s claim that the Strait of Hormuz would soon be reopened, insisting the waterway would remain under Iranian management regardless of any deal’s terms.
Iran’s key demands — reparations, troop withdrawal, sanctions relief, asset unfreezing, and a halt to the naval blockade — remain largely unmet by any proposal Washington has publicly acknowledged. The gap between what Tehran says it needs and what Washington says it will offer is still significant. Whether bridging that gap is achievable before Trump’s informal deadline of “this weekend” — now passed without a deal — remains genuinely uncertain.
Why This Matters for Africa, Ghana, and Ghanaian-Canadians
The Iran conflict and its potential resolution may feel distant from the day-to-day realities of life in Toronto or Accra — but its economic tentacles reach everywhere. The Strait of Hormuz blockade has kept global oil prices elevated for months, feeding through to higher fuel costs in Ghana, higher transportation costs across West Africa, and upward pressure on Canadian consumer prices at a time when cost-of-living concerns are already dominating political conversation.
A successful deal that reopens the Strait and ends active hostilities would provide meaningful relief — potentially lowering oil prices, easing inflationary pressure in Canada and Ghana, and reducing the geopolitical uncertainty that has been rattling global investment and trade. For Ghanaian-Canadian families sending remittances home, for Ghanaian businesses dependent on imported fuel and goods, and for the broader Canadian economy that Ghanaian-Canadians are embedded in, the Iran deal is not an abstract geopolitical story. It is a cost-of-living story in disguise.
