MFAT: US and Iran probably unlikely to return to full fighting
MFAT assesses it is probably unlikely the United States and Iran will return to full-scale hostilities.
Deputy Secretary Taha Macpherson gave the assessment to RNZ in reporting published 13 September RNZ. Macpherson has led the ministry's policy group since 2024, after acting as deputy secretary for the Europe, Middle East, Africa and Australia group. He was speaking as the policy lead, not for the consular or operational teams who help New Zealanders overseas.
The assessment follows a stop-start pattern through the northern summer. Reuters reported on 28 June that Iran and the United States had agreed to halt recent hostilities in the Gulf and renew talks on their dispute over the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow shipping lane used for oil Reuters. Reuters reported on 2 September that hostilities renewed after weeks in which both sides had withheld fire Reuters. Iran said a US strike in that exchange killed four people and wounded dozens of civilians.
Macpherson said Pakistan and Oman facilitated talks between Tehran and Washington. He did not detail the format. According to MFAT, direct channels are limited, so third-party facilitation is how messages move and pauses are negotiated.
New Zealand's domestic machinery was activated early. An across-government response group of 11 agencies was set up after attacks on Iran began. Treasury is leading the fuel price response. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment is leading the supply response. MFAT said that split is deliberate, because price effects and physical supply need different data, different tools and different advice to ministers.
Fuel exposure runs through Asia rather than the Gulf directly. More than 90 per cent of New Zealand's fuel comes from Southeast Asia. According to MFAT, disruption risk is indirect, through global prices and shipping routes rather than direct supply from the conflict zone. Macpherson put the Red Sea and Suez Canal share at 12 to 15 per cent of global oil trade. He said any sustained pressure on those lanes would flow through to costs faced here.
Offshore, four posts carried the immediate load: Tehran, Abu Dhabi, Riyadh and Cairo. MFAT said that spread reflects where New Zealanders, contacts and reporting lines sit. Tehran gave the ground-level view. The other three covered the regional picture and onward help. The ministry described it as the usual pattern for a small network.
The broader context here for people working the system is risk management rather than resolution. Probably unlikely is careful language. It leaves room for miscalculation. It also signals MFAT does not see conditions for a sustained return to the opening intensity.
In my view, the domestic settings are worth watching as closely as the diplomacy. An 11-agency group is a substantial call on officials. Treasury on prices and MBIE on supply gives ministers two separate streams of advice. For select committee scrutiny later, the questions will be predictable. When was the group stood up. What thresholds were set. What was reported to Cabinet.
Looking at what this means for the next phase, facilitation will matter more than public positioning. Pakistan and Oman are named as facilitators. That tells officials where process sits. It does not tell them whether talks narrow to Hormuz transit or widen. For Wellington, the task is monitoring fuel prices, supply lines and consular settings.
