translate
English
پارسی
English
Englishپارسی
English
Englishپارسی
EnglishپارسیEnglishپارسیImportance: High ★★★
UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed deep concern on Sunday, July 12, 2026, over the renewed military confrontation and serious escalation in the Gulf.
Guterres said attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, U.S. strikes against Iran and Iranian attacks on targets in neighbouring countries must stop. He called on Iran and the United States to immediately resume negotiations and resolve all outstanding issues through diplomacy.
The UN chief’s appeal came as renewed strikes increased risks to civilian infrastructure, regional security and maritime traffic through one of the world’s most important energy corridors. However, no new ceasefire or formal agreement was announced alongside his statement.
Possible Market Effect:
The statement supports diplomatic de-escalation, but it is unlikely to significantly move markets unless Iran and the United States confirm the resumption of negotiations.
Concrete diplomatic progress could reduce the geopolitical premium in crude oil and gold and support global equities. Continued attacks on vessels, neighbouring countries or military targets would instead strengthen risk-off sentiment.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Q: What did António Guterres ask Iran and the United States to do?
A: He called on both countries to immediately resume negotiations and resolve their outstanding disputes through diplomacy.
Q: Did the UN Secretary-General announce a new ceasefire between Iran and the United States?
A: No. Guterres called for an end to the attacks and renewed negotiations, but he did not announce a ceasefire agreement.
Q: Is Guterres’s diplomatic appeal negative for crude oil and gold?
A: The appeal alone is neutral. It could become negative for their geopolitical risk premium if negotiations resume and military attacks decline.
Source: António Guterres’ official account on X and the United Nations.
Importance: High ★★★
Retired General Frank McKenzie, the former commander of U.S. Central Command, said on Sunday, July 12, 2026, that the U.S. military has the capability to control and keep the Strait of Hormuz open if President Donald Trump decides to pursue that course.
Speaking to CBS News’ Face the Nation, McKenzie said such an operation would require deploying U.S. warships into the strait’s narrow waters. He acknowledged that the U.S. Navy would prefer to avoid operating in such a confined and high-risk area but said it was highly capable of doing so if necessary.
McKenzie argued that Iran’s leadership generally responds to military force and extreme pressure. He said that securing concessions from Tehran would require direct pressure on the Iranian government, potentially involving actions viewed by its leaders as a threat to regime survival. He stressed that the objective would be to change Tehran’s conduct rather than pursue regime change.
The former CENTCOM commander also said U.S. military capabilities could be used to open and maintain passage through the Strait of Hormuz. His comments represent a strategic assessment by a retired military commander, not an announcement that the Trump administration has decided to seize or militarily control the waterway.
Possible Market Effect:
McKenzie’s remarks could reinforce concerns that the United States may expand its military presence inside the Strait of Hormuz if commercial traffic faces further threats. Deployment of U.S. warships into the narrow waterway would increase the risk of direct confrontation, accidental escalation and disruption to energy shipments.
The comments are moderately supportive of the geopolitical risk premium in crude oil and gold. However, the market effect may remain limited unless the Trump administration announces an actual military operation or tanker traffic is materially disrupted.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Oil remains cautiously buyable because military control of the strait would place U.S. and Iranian forces in closer proximity. Nevertheless, McKenzie’s remarks alone do not constitute an operational decision and therefore do not create an unconditional strong-buy signal.
Q: Did Frank McKenzie say the United States currently controls the Strait of Hormuz?
A: No. He said the U.S. military has the capability to control and keep the strait open if President Trump orders such an operation.
Q: What would a U.S. operation to control the Strait of Hormuz require?
A: According to McKenzie, it would require deploying American warships into the narrow waters of the strait.
Q: Did Frank McKenzie call for regime change in Iran?
A: No. He said the objective would be to change the Iranian government’s conduct by applying intense pressure, not to remove the government.
Q: Are McKenzie’s comments positive for crude oil and gold?
A: They are moderately supportive because they raise the possibility of a larger U.S. military presence near a critical energy route. The market effect would strengthen if an operation is officially ordered or shipping is disrupted.
Source: CBS News, Face the Nation, July 12, 2026.
Importance: High ★★★
Kuwait’s Ministry of Defence said three northern land-border posts and an offshore drilling platform operated by the Kuwait Oil Company were attacked on Sunday, July 12, 2026.
The ministry said the attacks on the border posts caused material damage. It added that a hostile drone struck the offshore drilling platform in Kuwaiti territorial waters, causing damage and injuring one employee, who was receiving medical treatment.
Kuwait’s armed forces said they remained at the highest level of readiness and were coordinating with the relevant authorities to safeguard the country’s security and territorial integrity. The ministry’s statement did not publicly identify the party responsible for the attacks.
Earlier regional and unofficial reports referred to explosions near the Iraq-Kuwait border. Those reports were not independently confirmed at the time of publication.
Possible Market Effect:
An attack on an offshore Kuwait Oil Company asset increases concerns about the vulnerability of Gulf energy infrastructure. Although no interruption to oil production was immediately confirmed, further attacks could raise crude oil prices, maritime insurance costs and operational risks for regional energy companies.
The incident could also pressure Kuwaiti and Gulf equities, particularly energy, transport, aviation and tourism-related shares.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Q: What locations were attacked in Kuwait on July 12, 2026?
A: Kuwait said three northern border posts and a Kuwait Oil Company offshore drilling platform were attacked.
Q: Was anyone injured in the attack on the Kuwaiti offshore platform?
A: Yes. Kuwait’s Ministry of Defence said one platform employee was injured and received medical treatment.
Q: Did Kuwait identify who carried out the attacks?
A: The Ministry of Defence described the platform strike as a hostile drone attack but did not publicly identify the responsible party in its initial statement.
Q: Is the attack on Kuwait’s offshore platform bullish for crude oil?
A: It is moderately bullish because it raises concerns about Gulf oil infrastructure. The market effect would become stronger if production, exports or other offshore facilities are disrupted.
Source: Kuwait Ministry of Defence, Kuwait Oil Company reporting and Associated Press.
Importance: High ★★★
Iranian authorities reported renewed attacks on Qeshm Island and areas near Bandar Abbas on Sunday, July 12, 2026, as military confrontation around the Strait of Hormuz intensified.
Iran’s state-run IRNA cited Qeshm Governor Hossein Amir-Teymouri as saying between 10 and 11 projectiles struck military targets on the island. He said all the targets were military and that the attacks caused no casualties. Explosions were also reported in Bandar Abbas and Hajiabad.
Fars News Agency separately reported that residents heard several explosions east of Bandar Abbas and around the maritime areas of Qeshm, including the southern part of the island. The exact nature of the explosions was initially unclear, and some early local reports remained unverified.
Axios, citing a senior U.S. official, reported that U.S. forces conducted several strikes against Iranian missile and air-defence systems and targeted small fast boats operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps at multiple locations around the Strait of Hormuz. Reuters and the Associated Press subsequently carried the U.S. official’s account.
Possible Market Effect:
Direct attacks on missile systems, air-defence positions and IRGC naval assets close to the Strait of Hormuz increase the risk of further retaliation and disruption to commercial shipping. The development is supportive of the geopolitical risk premium in crude oil and gold, while potentially pressuring regional equities and shipping-related assets.
The bullish effect on oil would strengthen if tanker traffic declines, vessels are damaged or Iran retaliates against energy and maritime infrastructure.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Q: How many projectiles reportedly struck Qeshm Island on July 12, 2026?
A: The governor of Qeshm said between 10 and 11 projectiles struck military targets on the island.
Q: Were casualties reported in the attacks on Qeshm Island?
A: Iranian authorities said there were no casualties and that all the reported targets were military.
Q: What did the United States reportedly target near the Strait of Hormuz?
A: According to Axios and a senior U.S. official, the strikes targeted Iranian missile and air-defence systems as well as small IRGC fast boats.
Q: Are the latest attacks near Qeshm positive for crude oil prices?
A: They are moderately bullish because Qeshm is located close to the Strait of Hormuz. The effect would become stronger if the attacks disrupt tanker traffic or provoke further retaliation.
Source: IRNA, Fars News Agency, Axios, Reuters and Associated Press.
Importance: High ★★★
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) strongly condemned the Iranian attacks targeting Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Jordan on Sunday, July 12, 2026.
The organization described the attacks as a flagrant and continuing violation of the sovereignty of the affected countries and a breach of the principles of good neighbourliness and mutual respect. It stressed the need to respect the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of all regional states.
The statement adds to growing diplomatic pressure on Tehran as governments across the region protest missile and drone attacks affecting Gulf states and Jordan. Recent hostilities have also increased concerns about commercial shipping, energy infrastructure and the stability of the Strait of Hormuz.
Possible Market Effect:
A coordinated condemnation from the OIC reinforces the perception that the conflict is becoming diplomatically and geographically broader. This could support the geopolitical risk premium in crude oil and gold, while increasing pressure on Gulf equities, aviation, shipping and other risk-sensitive regional assets.
The market reaction would become stronger if the attacks lead to additional military retaliation, disruption of oil exports or restrictions on commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Q: Which countries were included in the OIC’s condemnation of the Iranian attacks?
A: The OIC referred to attacks targeting Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Jordan.
Q: Why did the OIC condemn the Iranian attacks?
A: The organization said the attacks violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of regional countries and breached the principles of good neighbourliness and mutual respect.
Q: Is the OIC statement bullish for crude oil and gold?
A: It is moderately supportive because it highlights the widening regional and diplomatic impact of the conflict. A stronger bullish effect would require confirmed disruption to energy supplies or maritime traffic.
Source: Organization of Islamic Cooperation and Qatar News Agency.
Importance: High ★★★
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz said on Sunday, July 12, 2026, that Iran was failing to comply with the preliminary understanding reached by negotiators in June, warning that “all options are on the table.”
In an interview with ABC News, Waltz described the agreement as a performance-based memorandum of understanding and argued that Iran’s recent conduct—including attacks on neighbouring countries, civilian vessels and infrastructure, as well as reported mining in international waterways—violated its commitments.
Waltz also rejected Iran’s reported private explanation that attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz were caused by an errant element within its military system. He questioned how junior personnel could independently attack commercial vessels without facing consequences within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ centralized command structure.
The U.S. envoy said Iran still appeared to believe it could use disruption to the global economy as leverage. He added that 143 UN member states had previously supported a position condemning Iran’s mining of the Strait of Hormuz and its attempt to place pressure on the global economy.
The statements represent the U.S. government’s assessment. Iran has accused Washington of violating the ceasefire and has presented a different account of incidents involving vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.
Possible Market Effect:
The warning that all options remain available increases the risk of further U.S. military action and could strengthen the geopolitical premium in crude oil and gold. Additional attacks on commercial vessels, mining incidents or a measurable decline in tanker traffic would reinforce risk-off sentiment.
Conversely, renewed negotiations and verified compliance with the June understanding could reduce demand for safe-haven assets and place downward pressure on oil’s geopolitical premium.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
The warning supports cautious buying in oil and gold, but a stronger signal would require confirmation of new military operations or a physical disruption to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
Q: Is Iran complying with the preliminary agreement reached in June, according to Mike Waltz?
A: No. Waltz said Iran was not fulfilling the performance-based commitments included in the preliminary understanding.
Q: Did Mike Waltz accept Iran’s explanation that attacks on vessels were caused by a mistake?
A: No. He questioned whether an unauthorized military element could attack commercial vessels without consequences from Iran’s centralized military command.
Q: What did Mike Waltz mean by saying all options are on the table?
A: The statement indicates that the United States has not ruled out further diplomatic, economic or military measures against Iran.
Q: Is the latest U.S. warning supportive of crude oil and gold?
A: Yes, moderately. The warning raises escalation risks and supports their geopolitical premium, although the effect would be stronger if shipping or energy supplies were physically disrupted.
Source: ABC News, CBS News and the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.
Importance: Medium ★★
Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Sunday, July 12, 2026, that Islamabad was following the latest regional developments with deep concern as renewed hostilities increased tensions across the region.
Pakistan called on all parties, particularly Iran and the United States, to exercise restraint, take immediate steps toward de-escalation and respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every country in the region. It also urged the parties to uphold their commitments under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding.
Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar also discussed the evolving situation by telephone with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Dar said dialogue and diplomacy remained the only viable path toward resolving disputes and achieving lasting regional peace and stability. Pakistan reiterated its readiness to continue playing a constructive diplomatic role.
The Pakistani Foreign Ministry has previously described the Islamabad MoU as an enduring framework for mutual understanding, regional stability and shared prosperity.
Possible Market Effect:
Pakistan’s statement is diplomatically supportive of de-escalation but is unlikely to move financial markets significantly without concrete action by the parties involved.
Verified compliance with the Islamabad MoU, reduced military operations and safer maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz could lower the geopolitical risk premium in crude oil and gold. Continued attacks or a formal breakdown of the agreement would have the opposite effect.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
This diplomatic statement does not provide a direct buy or sell signal. Markets will require evidence of reduced military activity and renewed implementation of the agreement before pricing in a meaningful decline in regional risk.
Q: What did Pakistan ask Iran and the United States to do on July 12, 2026?
A: Pakistan asked both sides to exercise restraint, immediately reduce tensions and comply with their commitments under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding.
Q: Did Pakistan announce a new ceasefire agreement?
A: No. Pakistan called for compliance with the existing memorandum, but it did not announce a new ceasefire or confirm that the renewed hostilities had ended.
Q: Is Pakistan’s de-escalation statement negative for crude oil and gold?
A: The statement could become moderately negative for their geopolitical risk premium if it leads to concrete diplomatic progress. On its own, however, its market effect remains neutral.
Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan, Xinhua and Anadolu Agency.
Importance: High ★★★
U.S. President Donald Trump claimed on Sunday, July 12, 2026, that Iran had accepted a proposed agreement with the United States one day earlier but attacked a commercial ship with a drone shortly after the meeting.
Trump said Iran had accepted what he described as a comprehensive agreement before launching the attack within approximately one to two hours. However, the White House did not release further details about the alleged agreement, and Iran did not publicly confirm that such a deal had been reached. Available reporting attributes Trump’s comments to NBC’s Meet the Press, rather than CNN.
The U.S. military said it subsequently struck approximately 140 Iranian military targets during attacks conducted on Saturday night and early Sunday. According to U.S. Central Command, the targets included missile and drone launch sites, naval facilities, ammunition depots, communication networks and surveillance positions.
The strikes followed an attack on the Cyprus-flagged container ship GFS Galaxy while it was travelling through the Strait of Hormuz near Oman. The vessel suffered serious engine-room damage, its crew abandoned the ship, and one Indian crew member was reported missing. The United States blamed Iran for the attack, while the Revolutionary Guard said vessels had ignored its warnings and navigation instructions.
Trump also said the United States considered the Strait of Hormuz open. CENTCOM similarly maintained that maritime traffic continued, although a U.S.-led maritime monitoring body said vessel movements were taking place at reduced levels.
Possible Market Effect:
The attack on a commercial vessel and the U.S. response against 140 military targets represent a sharp escalation and could increase the geopolitical risk premium in crude oil and gold. However, confirmation that some shipping continues through the Strait of Hormuz may limit the immediate upside in energy prices.
A confirmed reduction in tanker traffic, additional attacks on commercial vessels or higher maritime insurance costs would strengthen the bullish outlook for oil. Conversely, verified diplomatic progress and uninterrupted shipping would reduce the risk premium.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Oil remains cautiously buyable because commercial shipping is under direct military threat. Nevertheless, continued vessel traffic through the strait prevents the current development from becoming an unconditional strong-buy signal.
Q: Did Iran officially confirm that it had reached the agreement described by Donald Trump?
A: No. Trump said Iran had accepted an agreement, but Iran did not publicly confirm the deal, and the White House did not provide detailed terms.
Q: How many Iranian military targets did the United States say it struck?
A: U.S. Central Command said approximately 140 military targets were struck, including missile, drone, naval, ammunition, communication and surveillance facilities.
Q: Is the latest U.S.-Iran escalation bullish for crude oil?
A: It is moderately bullish because attacks on commercial shipping increase supply and transportation risks. The impact would become stronger if tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz declines materially.
Source: U.S. Central Command, NBC News, Associated Press and The Guardian.
Importance: High ★★★
U.S. President Donald Trump said in an interview with NBC on Sunday, July 12, 2026, that the Strait of Hormuz remained open to commercial traffic despite continuing military tensions between the United States and Iran.
U.S. Central Command, CENTCOM, separately said the strait was open to all vessels seeking lawful passage and that maritime traffic continued through the international waterway. CENTCOM added that U.S. forces were positioned and prepared to protect freedom of navigation.
The U.S. statements challenge Iran’s earlier announcement that it had closed the strategic waterway. Although vessel movements are continuing, the conflicting claims and ongoing military confrontation mean shipping risks have not been fully eliminated.
Possible Market Effect:
Confirmation that the Strait of Hormuz remains operational reduces the immediate probability of a complete disruption to oil and gas shipments. This could lower part of the geopolitical risk premium in crude oil prices and limit safe-haven demand.
However, the market impact depends on actual tanker movements and maritime security rather than official statements alone. Renewed attacks on ships, mines, insurance restrictions or a measurable fall in tanker traffic could quickly reverse the bearish effect.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Crude oil may face limited selling pressure while commercial traffic continues, but it is not a strong sell because the regional military risk remains high.
Q: Did Donald Trump say the Strait of Hormuz was closed on July 12, 2026?
A: No. Trump said the strait remained open to commercial traffic.
Q: Did CENTCOM confirm that ships were still passing through the Strait of Hormuz?
A: Yes. CENTCOM said the waterway was open to vessels seeking lawful passage and that maritime traffic was continuing.
Q: Is the confirmation that the Strait of Hormuz is open negative for crude oil prices?
A: It is moderately negative for oil’s geopolitical risk premium because it reduces fears of an immediate supply cutoff. However, continuing military tensions prevent a strongly bearish oil outlook.
Source: NBC News, U.S. Central Command and Reuters.
Importance: Medium ★★
Jean Arnault, the United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon, met Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Tehran on the afternoon of Sunday, July 12, 2026.
Arnault travelled to Tehran for consultations with Iranian officials. During the meeting, he reportedly expressed condolences over recent casualties in Iran and emphasized the importance of comprehensive efforts to restore peace and stability across the region. No detailed official statement regarding the specific subjects discussed or any agreements reached was immediately released.
The meeting comes amid continued military operations in southern Lebanon and heightened tensions involving Israel, Hezbollah and Iran. Arnault’s consultations with Tehran could therefore form part of broader UN diplomatic efforts to contain regional escalation, although this remains an inference until further details are published.
Possible Market Effect:
The meeting alone is unlikely to create a major market reaction. However, signs of effective UN mediation or progress toward reducing Israel-Hezbollah tensions could weaken safe-haven demand and reduce part of the geopolitical risk premium in crude oil and gold.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Q: What was the purpose of Jean Arnault’s meeting with Iran’s foreign minister?
A: Arnault visited Tehran to consult Iranian officials about Lebanon and regional developments, but detailed information about the discussions has not yet been released.
Q: Does the UN-Iran meeting signal an immediate ceasefire in Lebanon?
A: No. The meeting shows continued diplomatic engagement, but no ceasefire agreement or concrete outcome has been announced.
Source: Islamic Republic News Agency and ISNA.
Importance: High ★★★
The Israeli military said on Sunday, July 12, 2026, that reserve forces from the 551st Brigade Combat Team had destroyed more than 200 Hezbollah infrastructure sites and killed more than 80 members of the group during two months of operations in southern Lebanon.
According to the Israel Defense Forces, troops discovered and destroyed hundreds of weapons and military assets, including one strategic underground route, two additional underground passages, launch positions, weapons-storage facilities and Hezbollah observation posts.
The Israeli military said its operations would continue to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its military infrastructure and to eliminate threats against Israel. The reported figures were issued by the Israeli military and have not been independently verified.
Possible Market Effect:
Continued Israeli military operations in southern Lebanon could increase concerns about a broader Israel-Hezbollah escalation. The immediate market effect is likely to be moderately supportive of safe-haven assets such as gold and the U.S. dollar, while adding a limited geopolitical risk premium to crude oil.
The market impact would become significantly stronger if Hezbollah launches a large-scale retaliation, fighting expands deeper into Lebanon, or regional energy and shipping infrastructure is threatened.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
This report alone does not confirm a new phase of escalation. Therefore, gold and oil are cautiously buyable rather than strong buys, pending Hezbollah’s response and further developments on the ground.
Q: What did the Israeli military claim about its two-month operation in southern Lebanon?
A: The Israeli military said its forces destroyed more than 200 Hezbollah infrastructure sites and killed more than 80 members of the group.
Q: What Hezbollah military infrastructure did Israel say it discovered and destroyed?
A: Israel said its troops destroyed underground routes, launch positions, weapons-storage facilities, observation posts and hundreds of weapons and military assets.
Q: Is the latest Israel-Hezbollah news bullish for gold and crude oil?
A: It is moderately supportive of gold and could add a limited risk premium to oil. A stronger bullish effect would require a major Hezbollah retaliation or a broader regional escalation.
Source: Israel Defense Forces statement published on X.
Importance: High ★★★
The U.S. Embassy in Oman issued a “shelter in place” security alert on Sunday, July 12, 2026, for the Musandam Governorate, near the Strait of Hormuz, and the port city of Duqm on the Arabian Sea coast.
American citizens in Musandam and Duqm were advised to remain inside their residences, hotels or other secure buildings as much as possible, stay away from windows and closely follow instructions issued by local authorities. The embassy also imposed travel restrictions on U.S. government personnel travelling to the two areas.
The warning followed Oman’s announcement that drone attacks had targeted sites in the governorates of Musandam and Al Wusta earlier on Sunday. Musandam occupies a strategically sensitive position next to the Strait of Hormuz, while Duqm is an important commercial, industrial and maritime hub in Al Wusta.
Oman subsequently summoned Iran’s ambassador and delivered a formal protest note over the drone attacks. The Omani Foreign Ministry described the incidents as irresponsible acts and stressed the importance of respecting national sovereignty, good-neighbourly relations and non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs.
Possible Market Effect:
Drone attacks inside Oman, traditionally regarded as one of the region’s more neutral and diplomatically stable states, represent a broader geographical escalation of the conflict. Attacks near Musandam could increase concerns about maritime security and energy shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, while risks surrounding Duqm could affect expectations for port, logistics and energy infrastructure operations.
The news is potentially supportive of the geopolitical risk premium in crude oil and gold, while increasing pressure on regional equities, shipping companies and other risk-sensitive assets.
Market Condition and Sentiment:
Oil remains cautiously buyable while security threats persist near Musandam and the Strait of Hormuz. However, a stronger bullish signal would require evidence of disrupted tanker movements, port closures or physical damage to energy infrastructure.
Q: Why did the U.S. Embassy issue a security alert for Musandam and Duqm in Oman?
A: The alert was issued after drone attacks targeted locations in Musandam and Al Wusta, increasing security risks near the Strait of Hormuz and the port city of Duqm.
Q: How did Oman respond to the drone attacks on its territory?
A: Oman summoned Iran’s ambassador, delivered a formal protest note and stressed that the attacks violated the principles of sovereignty, good neighbourliness and non-interference.
Q: Are the drone attacks in Oman positive for crude oil prices?
A: The attacks are potentially bullish for oil because they increase risks surrounding the Strait of Hormuz and regional maritime infrastructure. The impact would become stronger if tanker traffic or energy operations were materially disrupted.
Source: U.S. Embassy in Muscat, Oman Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Reuters.