Despite numerous American forecasts yesterday that an Iranian revenge strike, as described, would come within hours, the night passed peacefully in the Middle East, with Tehran not executing any attacks against sites in Israel as "retribution" for the bombing of its consulate in Damascus earlier this April. What happened, one wonders? Did some American officials miscalculate, or did Iran genuinely postpone its strike?
There is no doubt that there is not just one answer to these questions, but various speculations and analyses. Some observers noted that the extension of U.S. Central Command Chief General Eric Kurilla's stay in Israel after arriving there last Thursday might be one reason for the postponement of the Iranian strike. In this context, Charles Lester, director of counterterrorism and extremism programs at the Middle East Institute, tweeted: "It would be audacious for Iran to attack Israeli territory with the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East there."
Meanwhile, a strategist from the Revolutionary Guard stated that the country wants to take advantage of the widening rift between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Biden regarding Israel’s conduct in the Gaza war, rather than unite them in hostility towards Iran, as reported by The New York Times, which might explain the postponement of potential attacks.
Additionally, some Iranian officials clarified that Tehran believes it can garner international support for its retaliatory strike over time by focusing attention on the attack on its embassy—an incident that is considered a rare violation of war rules—and by asserting that it is merely acting in self-defense.
In this context, Mahdi Mohammadi, a senior advisor to the Iranian Parliament Speaker and the Revolutionary Guard, wrote on the platform X: "For every wise player, there comes a moment when the cost-benefit analysis changes and all strategies are reset," possibly hinting at Iran's restraint in carrying out attacks against Israel in order to gain some international understanding, even though this seems unlikely.
Conversely, a number of analysts believe that Tehran does not wish to escalate or expand the war in the region and may settle for localized, non-escalatory strikes. Raz Zimt, a senior researcher at the Israeli National Security Studies Institute, stated, "I still believe that Iran does not want to engage in a direct and extensive military confrontation with Israel, and certainly not against the United States." However, he added that it "must do something," according to Reuters.
It is noteworthy that Iranian sources and diplomats from the United States, Israel's primary protector, previously reported that Tehran had notified Washington of its desire to avoid escalation and would not act hastily. Nevertheless, the risk remains that any reaction could spiral out of control!
