Iran reportedly agreed in principle to the proposed mechanisms but rejected any nuclear concessions

• Tehran maintains that negotiations over its nuclear programme can take place only after the war ends, the siege is lifted and the Strait of Hormuz reopens

Agreement in principle on mechanisms while rejecting substance is a familiar pattern in Iran negotiations: procedural movement that allows both sides to claim progress without either conceding the core issue. The sequencing demand, that nuclear talks follow rather than precede an end to hostilities and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, inverts the order counterparties have historically insisted on, and such inversions have tended to stall rather than unlock processes. For crude, the operative channel is not the diplomatic language but the physical one: Hormuz status, insurance and freight costs, and any change to sanctions enforcement on Iranian barrels already reaching market. Headlines of this kind have repeatedly produced short-lived relief rallies in risk and dips in crude that fade once the absence of actual concessions registers. The tells worth noting are whether intermediaries confirm the account, whether the other side accepts the proposed sequencing, and any concrete movement on shipping through the strait rather than further statements of principle.