Between U.S.-Iranian secrecy and Hormuz messages… who is driving the game?

Prepared and Analyzed by
Strategic Media Department – BETH | B
Supervised by Abdullah Al-Omairah

After 111 days of war, battles are no longer fought only with missiles.

The new front has become the negotiating table.

But these are not quiet negotiations. They represent another kind of war, where secrecy mixes with military signaling, and diplomacy blends with pressure and displays of power.

Why all this secrecy?

Although the broad framework of the U.S.-Iran memorandum is known, Swiss authorities have emphasized strict confidentiality.

The reason is not merely security.

Secrecy itself is part of the negotiations.

General principles can be made public.

But sensitive details—such as:

• Uranium enrichment levels.
• Verification mechanisms.
• The role of regional proxies.
• American guarantees.
• Israeli red lines.
• Sanctions and how they might be lifted.

These issues require confidentiality to prevent every sentence from becoming a political or media battle.

Therefore, secrecy does not necessarily imply hidden agreements. Rather, it reflects the sensitivity of this stage and the desire to shield negotiations from external pressure before final understandings are reached.

Why are Vance and Qalibaf leading the talks?

The presence of J.D. Vance and Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf carries important implications.

They do not merely represent traditional diplomacy.

They represent political and security decision-making circles.

This suggests that negotiations have moved beyond exploratory contacts and entered a phase focused on larger and more sensitive arrangements.

Why did the Revolutionary Guard announce the closure of Hormuz?

The Revolutionary Guard's declaration regarding the Strait of Hormuz, coinciding with Israeli strikes in Lebanon, was less a legal announcement than a political message.

Iran's message was clear:

If our interests or our regional assets come under severe pressure, we possess tools capable of threatening the global economy.

But the American response was swift:

Iran does not control the Strait.

Navigation continues.

Oil flows uninterrupted.

And U.S. forces remain committed to enforcing the agreement.

What does the American response mean?

Washington's response carried three messages:

First:

Rejecting any notion that Iran can impose a new reality in Hormuz.

Second:

Reassuring global markets and preventing panic in energy markets.

Third:

Reaffirming that the United States still holds the keys to maritime security in the Gulf.

In other words:

The Revolutionary Guard said:

"We can escalate."

Washington replied:

"And we can prevent it."

Has the war of negotiations begun?

Yes.

What is happening today is neither full peace nor all-out war.

It is a war of negotiations.

Each side is trying to improve its position before a final agreement emerges.

Iran is using:

• Regional influence.
• Proxy networks.
• Hormuz.
• Time.

The United States is using:

• Sanctions.
• Military power.
• Economic leverage.
• Political pressure.

Israel is using:

• Active fronts.
• Preventive strikes.
• Pressure on Washington.

Meanwhile, the Gulf states are seeking to preserve stability and prevent old threats from returning under the cover of a new agreement.

Are we witnessing an internal Iranian struggle?

Possibly.

Statements by the Revolutionary Guard may also reflect an internal battle.

While the Iranian state negotiates, the military establishment does not want to appear as if it has abandoned the language of strength.

Some statements may therefore be aimed more at domestic audiences than at foreign ones.

Day 111 Reflection

After 111 days…

The war is no longer confined to the battlefield.

It has moved to the negotiating table.

The guns may fall silent.

But the struggle over the terms of peace…

May prove even fiercer than the war itself.

And so the real question is no longer:

Will the negotiations succeed?

But rather:

Who will succeed in imposing their own definition of peace?

Because some wars end with agreements.

But some agreements…

Become the beginning of new wars.