The Islamic Republic’s Influence Network in the United States – Part One

Executive Summary

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has stated that the threat posed by Islamist ideology represents “the greatest near- and long-term threat to American freedom.” One concrete dimension of that threat has received limited sustained scrutiny: the construction of durable, institution-based influence networks operating inside the United States through religious, educational, and nonprofit structures. This report examines several of these networks built by the Islamic Republic over several decades, designed for persistence, replication, and adaptation rather than short-term or covert operations.

At the center of this architecture sits the Alavi Foundation, a New York City-based nonprofit whose principal asset, a 36‑story office tower located on Fifth Avenue, generates sustained revenue used to support affiliated institutions nationwide. Court filings and public reporting describe the foundation as operating under the direction of Islamic Republic officials. Through Alavi-funded properties, clerical placements, and affiliated organizations, Tehran has established long-term institutional footholds that extend beyond cultural or religious activity. According to the foundation’s own disclosures, its aid program has supported more than thirty-five organizations across the United States. Tehran’s messaging, personnel, and ideological guidance are disseminated domestically, forming an infrastructure that extends beyond isolated religious or cultural programming.

Across regions, the model is consistent. An anchor property provides permanence and legal insulation. Clerics and administrators trained in Iran, primarily in Qom, supply ideological leadership. Accredited K–12 schools, youth programs, and community organizations extend influence into weekday education and social life. Over time, personnel establish additional mosques and programs, reproducing the same structure in adjacent communities. The result is a network of interoperable nodes through which money, ideas, and individuals circulate across state lines.

The Washington, D.C., metropolitan area represents the origin point of this approach. Early efforts centered on institutional capture and intimidation, including the attempted takeover of the Islamic Center of Washington in 1981. Within the same region, the Muslim Student Association–Persian-Speaking Group (MSA–PSG) emerged as a critical node. FBI reporting and Senate testimony characterize the group as an intelligence-gathering and transnational repression platform aligned with the Islamic Republic, operating under the cover of a campus-recognized student organization.

In Maryland and Virginia, the network evolved into a replicable school–mosque model. The Islamic Education Center in Potomac combined an Alavi-funded property with a co-located K–12 school, embedding clerical ideology into daily education. That configuration proved durable and portable. In Virginia, affiliated actors adapted the same approach through youth-facing cultural and language programs that served as entry points to structured religious and ideological instruction.

Michigan demonstrates the model under conditions of demographic concentration and institutional density. In Dearborn, where a large Shiʿa population is geographically concentrated, multiple aligned institutions reinforce one another. Anchor mosques, splinter centers, private schools, youth organizations, and media platforms function as an ecosystem that normalizes regime-aligned narratives within routine communal life.

Texas illustrates the same architecture operating at scale across large metropolitan areas. In Houston, an Alavi-funded anchor institution supports a full-time private school, coordinated youth rituals packaged for Iranian state media, and an outward-facing mobilization arm that translates religious ideology into activist frameworks accessible to non-Muslim audiences. Parallel structures operate in the Dallas–Fort Worth area, where conversion programs and youth networks replicate the same model in a separate metropolitan context.

Taken together, these cases show a coherent strategy rather than disconnected incidents. The network emphasizes long-term investment, youth formation, clerical circulation, and property ownership to ensure persistence across leadership changes and periods of scrutiny. Addressing this challenge requires policy responses that focus on structural enablers rather than isolated actors, enforce existing transparency and disclosure requirements, and protect civil liberties while preventing foreign state exploitation of open civic space.

Read the full report below or click the link here.