Editor’s note: Seymur Mammadov is a special commentator for News.Az and the director of the international expert club EurAsiaAz. The article reflects the author’s personal opinion and does not necessarily represent the views of News.Az.
The preliminary agreement between the United States and Iran has become one of the most important political developments of recent months and is already beginning to reshape the international agenda. For Washington and Tehran, it is an attempt to move away from a dangerous phase of direct confrontation. For the Middle East, it offers a chance to reduce military tensions. For global markets, it is a signal of possible stabilisation in oil supplies and the restoration of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s key energy corridors.
The G7’s reaction to the agreement showed that leading Western powers view it not merely as a bilateral diplomatic success for the United States and Iran, but as an event of global significance. The leaders of the Group of Seven welcomed the preliminary deal and expressed their readiness to support its implementation. This wording is important: it is not simply about backing a peace initiative, but about an attempt to integrate the US–Iran agreement into a broader architecture of international security.
The reason for such attention is clear. The conflict involving Iran has long gone beyond the framework of a regional crisis. It affects nuclear security, energy markets, maritime logistics, US relations with its Middle Eastern allies, and the economic interests of Europe and Asia. Any escalation in the Persian Gulf is immediately reflected in oil prices, shipping costs, insurance rates, and inflation expectations. That is why even a preliminary agreement between Washington and Tehran is being perceived by markets as a factor capable of altering the global economic balance.
Source: theoregongroup
The Strait of Hormuz is of particular importance. A significant share of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies passes through it. Any restrictions or threats to shipping in this area immediately create the risk of an energy shock. That is why reports of a possible restoration of full tanker passage through Hormuz have become a key factor behind the market reaction. Oil prices stabilised after a sharp decline, as investors began to assess not only the agreement itself, but also the practical timeline for restoring normal shipping.
However, the initial market reaction does not mean that the crisis is already over. The drop in oil prices reflects expectations, but it does not guarantee a quick return to the previous situation. Tankers, insurance companies, shipowners, and energy traders will wait for confirmation that routes are safe. Even if a political agreement is signed, restoring confidence in the Hormuz corridor may take weeks or months. Any incident, provocation, or disagreement over the implementation of the deal could bring volatility back to the market.
The key question remains the conditions under which the two sides are ready to move towards a final agreement. According to preliminary information, Iran insisted during the talks on an end to any US naval blockade, the restoration of free passage for vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, the unfreezing of part of its assets, and the opportunity to resume oil exports. Tehran also reportedly initially raised the issue of compensation, although instead of direct compensation, discussions are now focused on the creation of a large private investment fund to support the recovery and development of the Iranian economy.
The United States, in turn, is demanding that Iran abandon any pursuit of nuclear weapons, agree to strict inspections, observe a ceasefire regime, and guarantee the security of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Washington is also making it clear that any easing of sanctions will depend on Tehran’s compliance with its nuclear and military-political obligations. In other words, the future of the agreement will depend not only on political declarations, but also on verifiable steps by both sides.
For the United States, the agreement has several dimensions. First, Washington gains an opportunity to reduce the risk of a new major war in the Middle East. Second, stabilisation of the oil market could help ease inflationary pressure, which is particularly important for the US economy and financial markets. Third, a deal with Iran allows the United States to redirect political attention to other priorities — Ukraine, China, the Indo-Pacific region, and global competition for technology and resources.
For Iran, the agreement could also open a new window of opportunity. Tehran is interested in reducing pressure on its economy, expanding oil exports, and partially restoring access to international financial and trade channels. The Iranian economy has lived under sanctions pressure for years, and restrictions on oil exports remain one of its main vulnerabilities. If the deal leads to even a partial easing of restrictions, it could provide Tehran with additional resources and room for manoeuvre.
But this is where the main question arises: how sustainable will the agreement be? The history of US–Iranian relations shows that even agreements already reached can quickly collapse under pressure from domestic political factors, regional conflicts, and mutual distrust. In the United States, any agreement with Iran triggers a sharp debate between supporters of diplomacy and those who believe Tehran uses negotiations to buy time. Inside Iran, there are also forces that view concessions to the West as a threat to the political stability of the system.
Source: Reuters
Another factor is the position of Israel and the Arab states of the Persian Gulf. For Israel, Iran’s nuclear programme and Tehran’s regional network of allies remain matters of national security. Even if Washington and Tehran agree to end direct confrontation, this will not automatically remove tensions surrounding Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and other regional arenas. The Arab monarchies of the Gulf, meanwhile, will closely watch whether the agreement leads to a strengthening of Iran as a regional player.
This is why the G7 is seeking to participate in the implementation process. For Europe, stabilisation around Iran is extremely important. European countries depend on stable energy markets, maritime trade, and predictable supply chains. After the energy crisis caused by the war in Ukraine and the move away from dependence on Russian energy resources, Europe has become especially sensitive to new shocks in the oil and gas market. A US–Iran peace agreement could become a stabilising factor, but only if it is accompanied by effective monitoring mechanisms and guarantees for the security of shipping.
For the global economy, the significance of the agreement goes far beyond the oil market. A reduction in tensions in the Persian Gulf could lower inflation risks, support stock markets, reduce shipping costs, and improve business expectations. Investors are already assessing the possible restoration of supplies through Hormuz as a factor that could ease pressure on energy-dependent economies. This is especially important for Asian countries, which receive significant volumes of oil and gas from the Persian Gulf region.
Nevertheless, excessive optimism would be premature. A preliminary agreement is only the first stage. Ahead lie questions related to Iran’s nuclear programme, the sanctions regime, security guarantees, control over shipping, the role of regional allies, and mechanisms for addressing possible violations. If these issues are not resolved, the agreement may turn into a short-term pause before a new round of crisis.
The United States and Iran now face a rare opportunity to change the trajectory of their conflict. But success will depend not on declarations, but on the ability of both sides to fulfil their commitments. For Washington, it is important to prove to its allies that diplomacy does not mean weakness. For Tehran, it is important to show that the agreement can bring economic benefits without full capitulation to external pressure. For the G7, the task is to ensure international support for the process and prevent individual regional actors from disrupting the fragile balance.
Thus, the preliminary US–Iran agreement is indeed reshaping the global agenda. It affects energy, security, trade, inflation, and the strategic calculations of leading powers. But its real significance will become clear only once practical implementation begins. For now, markets are reacting with hope, diplomats with cautious support, and regional actors with wary anticipation. The world has been given a chance for de-escalation, but that chance remains fragile.
(If you possess specialized knowledge and wish to contribute, please reach out to us at opinions@news.az).