Oman stands apart in the Middle East for its consistent adherence to neutrality, a quality that has led observers to frequently describe the sultanate as the "Switzerland of the Middle East." In a region notorious for conflict and polarisation, Oman has managed to chart a path of diplomatic impartiality, maintaining cordial relationships across geopolitical divides from East to West. 

This longstanding tradition of neutrality, coupled with an aversion to entanglement in regional disputes, makes Oman uniquely positioned as a mediator, particularly visible in its current role facilitating dialogue between the United States and Iran. 

The roots of Omani neutrality can be traced back to the reign of Sultan Qaboos bin Said, who assumed power in 1970. Under his leadership, Oman developed a foreign policy marked by careful pragmatism and cautious engagement. Unlike its neighbours, the country consistently avoided taking sides in regional rivalries or adopting aggressive foreign policy stances, whilst also receiving military support from Iran when separatists from the southern border attempted to take out the government in the 1970s. Muscat's stance was evident during the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s, when Oman maintained diplomatic relations with both sides despite immense pressure to align with one or the other. Even as a founding member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Oman has often diverged from its peers by prioritising diplomatic openness over sectarian or political solidarity.

The Sultanate's distinctive demographic composition further reinforces its neutral stance. Most Omanis follow the Ibadi branch of Islam, a denomination distinct from both Sunni and Shia traditions. This religious moderation has helped insulate Oman from sectarian tensions and allowed it to cultivate strong relations with Sunni-majority Arab neighbours and Shia-majority Iran alike. Muscat’s ability to maintain these parallel relationships is a rare feat in a region where sectarian divides often determine alliances and conflicts.

Geography plays a significant role in Oman’s neutrality. Strategically located at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz – a critical artery for global oil shipments – Oman shares maritime interests with Iran, requiring cooperative engagement to ensure safe navigation. Its strategic location has encouraged Oman to prioritise diplomacy over confrontation, making it uniquely positioned to mediate between regional powers. This geographic isolation and advantage has helped Oman build trust with international powers, who view it as a reliable guarantor of regional stability and open communication. The country's reputation as a diplomatic bridge-builder is perhaps best exemplified by its involvement in US-Iran relations. In the early 2010s, Muscat quietly hosted backchannel talks between American and Iranian officials, negotiations that laid the groundwork for the original landmark 2015 nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). These secret discussions were a testament to Oman’s diplomatic skill and discretion, qualities that were vital in bringing two long-standing adversaries to the negotiating table. The Obama administration acknowledged that such an agreement would have been impossible without Oman’s careful diplomacy behind the scenes.

As diplomatic engagement between Washington and Tehran continues to face hurdles, Oman has again assumed a key mediating role. Recent indirect negotiations aimed at reviving aspects of the nuclear agreement have taken place in Muscat, with Omani diplomats shuttling messages between the parties. The choice of Oman as a venue and mediator underscores international recognition of its impartiality and discretion. Indeed, even as negotiations occasionally move to European cities, Oman remains the trusted intermediary, reflecting the high degree of confidence both Iran and the United States place in Muscat’s diplomatic judgment.

Beyond the nuclear file, Oman consistently acts as a discreet facilitator of dialogue in regional crises. During the Yemen conflict, it was the only Gulf country that chose neutrality over intervention, positioning itself as a trusted intermediary able to host peace talks and assist humanitarian efforts. Oman’s low-profile diplomatic style – marked by quiet telephone diplomacy, confidential shuttle missions, and behind-the-scenes negotiations – has also allowed it to broker sensitive prisoner exchanges and defuse maritime incidents in Gulf waters. Critically, Oman’s approach differs markedly from that of other regional actors who pursue influence through assertive or confrontational strategies. While some Gulf states have adopted interventionist policies in Yemen or pursued confrontational stances toward Qatar or Iran, Oman has consistently emphasised restraint and dialogue. This deliberate choice of quiet diplomacy over power projection has enhanced its regional standing, granting Muscat a measure of influence disproportionate to its size or military strength.

Yet Oman's steadfast neutrality, while commendable and strategic, is not without its limitations or vulnerabilities. The nation's policy of careful non-alignment depends heavily upon maintaining a delicate balance, something increasingly difficult amid intensifying regional polarisation. Some analysts argue that neutrality alone may not fully insulate Oman from the destabilising effects of regional power struggles. As geopolitical tensions heighten between major players like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and external powers such as the United States and China, Oman's diplomatic balancing act may prove increasingly precarious. The country's quiet, understated diplomacy – effective in closed-door negotiations – could also leave it marginalised in scenarios where louder, more assertive actors dominate international conversations. Moreover, internal economic challenges, including declining oil revenues and growing youth unemployment, add pressure on Muscat's leadership, potentially forcing tougher choices on foreign policy alignments or economic partnerships. As one analysis noted: "Oman’s diplomatic posture, though influential, is not entirely free of risks, as its neutrality can also be perceived as isolation or indecision by regional power players who demand clearer allegiances," one person said speaking on anonymity.