Iranian TV citing a source says if US violations continue, then the Strait of Hormuz will not open even with an agreement between Iran and Oman

Conditional threats over the Strait of Hormuz are a recurring instrument of Iranian signalling, and the established pattern is that closure rhetoric surfaces at moments of negotiation pressure without being acted on, since a sustained shutdown would sever Iran's own crude exports as much as those of its neighbours. What separates this from generic sabre-rattling is the framing: the condition is tied to alleged US violations and routed through reported talks with Oman, the longstanding back-channel in Gulf diplomacy, which makes the message a negotiating lever rather than an operational warning. Transmission to crude in past episodes of this kind has run through the geopolitical risk premium on the front of the WTI and Brent curves, with freight and war-risk insurance rates for Gulf loadings the first tangible channel, well ahead of any physical disruption. The distinction that matters for pricing is between rhetoric that lifts the prompt premium and verified impediments to tanker transit, which have historically been the point at which the market shifts from premium to outright repricing. The follow-ons worth noting are whether the sourcing hardens from anonymous Iranian TV attribution to official statement, and whether Oman or the US side responds, since escalatory exchanges in this channel have typically preceded either de-escalation or tanker incidents. As it stands this is a headline-level conditional, the lowest tier of the escalation ladder.