Iran Avoids Direct Attacks on Israel to Preserve Nuclear Deal Gains

Two main factions influence Iran's policy decisions: a pragmatic camp led by figures like Kalibaf and Araghchi, and a hardline faction represented by the Revolutionary Guards. The pragmatic camp seeks to maintain the recent nuclear understanding signed in Lucerne with the United States, aiming for further negotiations and benefits such as lifting oil sanctions and releasing frozen Iranian assets, including funds held in Qatar. This camp views direct attacks on Israel as too risky, fearing they would collapse the agreement and erase Iran's diplomatic and economic gains.

The hardline Revolutionary Guards faction opposes any deal with the US and favors armed confrontation. However, they currently refrain from escalating conflict with Israel due to concerns over Israel's potential overwhelming military response, which could include strikes deep inside Tehran and attempts to destabilize the regime. Iran also fears losing its remaining ballistic missile capabilities, which Israel aims to destroy.

Iran has instead focused on targeted attacks in the Gulf region, particularly in Kuwait and other Persian Gulf states, where responses from local countries and the US have been limited. The US also prefers to uphold the nuclear understanding for now. The situation remains tense, especially following the death of Khamenei, which sparked protests against Araghchi. If the US officially cancels the deal, Iran may retaliate against Israel, potentially reigniting a full-scale war.

In summary, Iran's restraint in attacking Israel directly stems from a strategic calculation to preserve the nuclear deal's benefits and avoid a devastating Israeli military response, while continuing limited regional provocations.