Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Al-Boussaïdi has described the recent war involving Iran, the United States and Israel as “a catastrophe”, urging regional and international actors to look beyond the conflict and build a new security architecture based on inclusion rather than decades-old policies of containment.

Writing in an opinion article published in the French newspaper Le Monde a day ago, Al-Boussaïdi opined that the war had exposed the shortcomings of the Gulf’s longstanding security framework and underscored the need for a lasting regional order.

“This war is a catastrophe,” he wrote, adding that it lacked “a mandate from the United Nations” and “has achieved none of the objectives officially assigned to it”.

“Nevertheless, if it finally allows the myth of containment in the Gulf to be buried, then there is reason for hope: the hope of seeing the emergence of a system that is fairer, more realistic and more effective, thus correcting nearly half a century of strategic errors,” he wrote.

Read: Oman says it continues ‘transparent, neutral cooperation’ with all parties over Hormuz

The article comes as the United States and Iran continue exchanging military strikes, with the conflict escalating further amid attacks on vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

The latest incidents follow renewed tensions in and around the strategic waterway after the war launched by the US and Israel against Iran on February 28.

Washington and Tehran signed the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding last month, including a Qatar- and Pakistan-brokered ceasefire as a step towards a final agreement to end the war. However, US President Donald Trump announced on July 8 that the ceasefire “is over” following renewed hostilities.

Al-Boussaïdi added that the people of Oman and its Gulf neighbours were now living with the consequences of “a war that should never have taken place”, adding that their greatest hope was to see the conflict come to a genuine end rather than merely a temporary halt in hostilities.

“Their most ardent wish is that we truly witness the end of this conflict [pitting the United States and Israel against Iran], and not merely a suspension of the fighting,” he wrote.

Calling for a shift in focus, he suggested that the region should draw lessons from the conflict instead of dwelling on the mistakes that led to it.

“Even if the war is not over and one of the parties commits the madness and recklessness of rekindling it, we must try to draw lessons from it. Rather than dwelling on the recent past, on the mistakes and errors of judgment that led to this crisis, we must now turn our gaze towards the future,” he wrote.

The Omani foreign minister argued that establishing a lasting framework to guarantee freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz should be an immediate priority. As one of the two countries bordering the strategic waterway, he added, Oman had a particular responsibility to work with Iran and the wider international community to ensure free navigation in accordance with international law.

He described the success of such consultations as vital for the global economy, noting that freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz remained one of the pillars of international trade. He also praised France’s role in the discussions but said the region needed to think beyond the strait alone.

Also Read: China urges US, Iran to avoid return of war, backs ‘lawful rights’ of coastal nations in Hormuz

“The Strait of Hormuz is only one element of a much broader strategic framework, which also calls for thorough reflection,” he wrote.

Al-Boussaïdi further argued that the Gulf’s security system had, since 1979, been organised around the doctrine of “containment”, which viewed Iran as an existential threat to the Arab Gulf and Western interests.

According to the article, that assumption had proved fundamentally flawed.

“The war has revealed just how much the policy of containment was a myth,” he wrote, arguing that decades of military spending, the expansion of US military bases in the Gulf, and a strategy of offshore protection had imposed enormous costs without delivering meaningful security.

He maintained that the gravest threats to Gulf security did not originate within the region itself but from decisions taken outside it.

“The most serious threats weighing on the security of the Gulf do not come from the region itself, but from decisions taken outside it, above all in Tel Aviv,” he wrote.

Al-Boussaïdi opined that the changing strategic landscape required Gulf states to rethink the region’s entire security architecture.

He argued that none of the eight states bordering the Gulf — Oman, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, Iran and Iraq — should be excluded from any future regional security framework.

“All must be involved in its design, participate in its implementation, and share the responsibilities that it entails,” he wrote.

The minister wrote that such a transformation would require difficult but pragmatic discussions, including a reassessment of existing partnerships with major powers such as the United States.

“It is obviously not a question of calling into question alliances firmly rooted in history and offering important prospects for cooperation. Rather, it is a matter of rebalancing them so that they better reflect the strategic realities revealed by the recent war,” he wrote.

He also argued that Gulf security could not be separated from the wider strategic environment, pointing to the northwestern Indian Ocean, the Bab al-Mandab Strait, and access to the Red Sea as interconnected maritime routes whose importance had been highlighted by the recent crisis.

According to Al-Boussaïdi, a broader legal and operational framework covering the wider region would help safeguard maritime trade and promote long-term prosperity.

Concluding his article, the Omani foreign minister wrote that the conflict, despite its devastating consequences, could still serve as a turning point if it prompted the region to abandon outdated security doctrines.

“If it finally allows the myth of containment in the Gulf to be buried, then there is reason for hope: the hope of seeing the emergence of a system that is fairer, more realistic and more effective, thus correcting nearly half a century of strategic errors,” he wrote.