Introduction

 Iran and the U.S. have experienced deep political, security, and geopolitical tensions for over four decades. While mutual threats and limited military actions (such as the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani or the missile strike on Ayn al-Asad base) have occurred, a full-scale direct conflict has never materialized. This article argues that the strategic awareness the U.S. possesses—of both Iran’s capabilities and its own limitations—has played a critical role in preventing war

 U.S. Awareness of Iran's Power The U.S. is well aware that, unlike many regional countries, Iran posse Iran possesses significant hard and soft power components

  • A vast and indigenous missile capability capable of targeting U.S. bases in the region.
  • A network of allies and proxy forces known as the "Axis of Resistance" active in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and Palestine
  • Proficiency in asymmetric warfare, guerrilla tactics, and cyber operations
  • Ideological and political influence across regional groups and populations

These factors have made the U.S. view any direct conflict with Iran as extremely costly and dangerous

 U.S. Awareness of Its Own Weaknesses and Constraints Despite unmatched military power, the U.S. faces several obstacles in confronting Iran

  • U.S. bases in the region (Iraq, Bahrain, Qatar, etc.) are within range of Iranian missiles
  • The legacy of costly and unsuccessful wars in Afghanistan and Iraq has turned U.S. public opinion against new military engagements
  • European allies generally oppose war, which undermines international legitimacy
  • A potential war with Iran would destabilize global markets and raise energy prices significantly

 Mutual Deterrence and War Avoidance Strategy The combination of Iranian strength and American limitations has led to a form of mutual deterrence. Instead of direct engagement, Washington employs alternative strategies

  • Severe economic and financial sanctions
  • Covert intelligence operations and cyber warfare
  • Targeted assassinations, such as that of General Soleimani

Iran, in return, carries out limited but strategic responses to send messages while avoiding all-out war

 Containment Over Confrontation In response to Iran’s growing power, the U.S. has opted for a containment strategy

  • Strengthening alliances with Arab states and Israel
  • Deploying missile defense systems in the region
  • Increasing diplomatic and media pressure on Iran

Iran, relying on an "active resistance" policy, has managed to absorb and counter many of the pressures imposed by the U.S

Conclusion

 What has prevented a direct war between Iran and the U.S. thus far is not simply military superiority or one-sided fear, but rather a strategic equilibrium and mutual deterrence. The United States recognizes that military confrontation with Iran—given Tehran’s defensive and offensive capabilities as well as U.S. internal and international constraints—would come at a high and unpredictable cost. This awareness remains the core factor in the continued avoidance of war