מדוע איראן לא ביצעה מתקפה בתוך ארצות הברית למרות האיומים?

SadaNews - למר despite the ongoing warnings issued by American intelligence agencies over the years about the possibility of Iran executing attacks inside the United States, this scenario has not materialized even during the most tense periods, raising questions about the reasons for this absence.

The American newspaper "Christian Science Monitor" addressed this issue in a report prepared by writer Anna Molrin Grop, who noted that warnings escalated following the American strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities last year, and then with the outbreak of the American-Israeli war against Iran this year, as it described the American strategy to combat "terrorism," issued by President Donald Trump's administration in May, labeling Iran and its agents as the "greatest threat to the United States from the Middle East."

Molrin Grop stated that the escalation of warnings coincided with reports indicating that Israel informed Washington of a potential Iranian plan to assassinate Trump.

However, experts believe that the absence of any attack within U.S. territory is not due to a decline in Iran's intentions, but rather to the difficulty of executing such operations, as the writer reported.

She quoted Daniel Byman, director of the program on irregular warfare and threats at the "Center for Strategic and International Studies," clarifying that any attack requires a complex network of financing, coordination, and the entry of operatives into the United States while avoiding intense security monitoring, a process that carries significant risks at every stage.

Byman also believes that the Iranian leadership has acted with a degree of political pragmatism, recognizing that executing a large-scale attack inside the United States could unify American public opinion behind a war that did not enjoy broad support, which does not serve Iranian interests.

The writer reviews an Iranian attempt foiled by U.S. authorities in 2011 to target the Saudi ambassador in Washington, in addition to the United States in May accusing one of the elements of the "Hezbollah Brigades" supported by Iran of planning to target Jewish temples in Los Angeles, Arizona, and New York, a case that ended in frustration after the FBI infiltrated the network through a confidential informant.

The report indicates that the success of the United States in preventing these schemes reflects a significant development in the capabilities of "counter-terrorism" agencies, which increasingly rely on intelligence cooperation, continuous monitoring, and infiltration of extremist networks, as well as receiving alerts from individuals within immigrant communities, which often refuse to engage in violent actions.

However, the writer quotes analysts expressing their concerns that recent reductions in the number of employees in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence could affect the effectiveness of counter-terrorism operations in the future, after lawmakers from both the Republican and Democratic parties warned that reducing personnel could weaken national security.

The Christian Science Monitor concludes that Iran's abstention from executing attacks within the United States reflects a mix of American security deterrence and Iranian political calculations, while the continuation of this balance depends on Washington's ability to maintain the readiness of its intelligence agencies.