When shadows become armies, diplomacy begins to speak the language of fear.
Tel Aviv, October 2025.
Israel’s intelligence apparatus has sounded an alarm that resonates far beyond the Middle East. According to a new assessment released by Mossad, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — through its elite Quds Force — allegedly commands a clandestine structure of roughly 11 000 operatives tasked with striking Jewish institutions around the world. The network, described as transnational and asymmetrical, is said to be coordinated under a figure known only as Sardar Amar.
The revelation emerged after a series of thwarted plots across Europe and Oceania. In Athens, authorities disrupted a 2024 attempt to set fire to a hotel and synagogue involving seven suspects, including two Iranian nationals. In Berlin, a man accused of scouting Jewish centers was detained following a joint operation between German and Danish intelligence. In Australia, police linked arson attacks against a synagogue in Melbourne and a Jewish restaurant in Sydney to operatives allegedly connected to Tehran’s intelligence proxies.
For Mossad, these incidents are not isolated. They form part of what Israeli analysts define as an “operational diaspora” — a distributed web of actors recruited from non-Iranian backgrounds to conceal any trace leading back to Tehran. Each cell functions autonomously, maintaining separation between planning, command, and execution, in line with Quds Force doctrine for deniable warfare.
The Israeli intelligence community argues that the resurgence of these operations traces back to the October 2023 attacks by Hamas, an event that reignited Iran’s ambition to externalize its influence under ideological and retaliatory pretexts. Within this framework, Jewish institutions abroad — synagogues, schools, and cultural centers — have become high-visibility symbols rather than random targets.
Western counterintelligence agencies, including Europol and the FBI, have been briefed on Mossad’s findings. While the details remain classified, early assessments suggest that several European capitals and diaspora hubs are now under heightened alert. Security officials in Paris, London, and Buenos Aires confirmed reinforced surveillance around Jewish neighborhoods and diplomatic facilities.
Strategically, the alleged 11 000-strong network would represent an evolution of Iran’s global reach. Beyond proxy militias in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen, it would mark Tehran’s transition from regional deterrence to worldwide covert projection — a shift reminiscent of Cold War-era influence operations but adapted to digital coordination, encrypted logistics, and freelance recruitment. If verified, such capacity would require not only vast financing but also advanced command-and-control channels to synchronize cells across continents.
Iran, for its part, dismissed the accusations as “psychological warfare.” Officials from its Foreign Ministry accused Israel of “manufacturing threats to justify aggression,” insisting that the allegations serve to distract from humanitarian crises in Gaza. Tehran’s media echoed this stance, portraying Mossad’s disclosure as an attempt to mobilize Western support for upcoming Israeli defense initiatives.
Yet the intelligence community outside Israel is treating the report with caution rather than skepticism. Analysts at the Royal United Services Institute in London pointed out that Iran has previously relied on asymmetric proxies to project deterrence and could feasibly extend that model globally. Meanwhile, security observers at the Peterson Institute in Washington emphasized that, even if the figure of 11 000 operatives were exaggerated, the existence of a coordinated structure — however limited — would already represent a severe intelligence challenge for democratic states.
Diplomatic responses have begun to surface. The European Union’s Counter-Terrorism Coordinator has reportedly proposed an emergency framework for intelligence-sharing on Iranian influence operations. In the United States, congressional committees are evaluating new sanctions targeting Quds Force assets abroad. Australia, which has seen tangible cases linked to Iranian agents, is considering re-listing parts of the IRGC as a terrorist organization under domestic law.
Beyond the geopolitical chessboard lies a psychological dimension. For Jewish communities worldwide, the Mossad revelation renews a sense of historical vulnerability. The idea of a coordinated strike network — even if partly unverified — functions as a weapon of intimidation in itself. Synagogues, community centers, and cultural spaces across several continents have received updated security advisories from local governments.
Experts in hybrid warfare note that this case illustrates the evolution of modern hostility: physical violence merges with cognitive warfare, rumor, and fear. Whether through verified plots or the suggestion of them, the objective remains the same — to induce insecurity and leverage it diplomatically. In that sense, Tehran’s alleged strategy aligns with the broader logic of the “grey-zone conflict,” where perception becomes as valuable as impact.
Ultimately, the Mossad disclosure is less a revelation than a reminder: that the front lines of modern conflict are rarely visible, that religious identity can still be weaponized, and that the architecture of fear is often more expansive than the facts that sustain it. For governments navigating this uncertain terrain, the challenge will be to balance vigilance with verification — and to ensure that protecting communities does not translate into amplifying the very terror they seek to deter.
Phoenix24: intelligence for free audiences. / Phoenix24: inteligencia para audiencias libres.