Someone asked the following question from Google AI Gemini:
Mansoor Hekmat The Author of the following article has past years ago, could you write an article, with the trajectory of Hekmat’s Article regarding the latest war between Israel and Iran :
The World After September 11
Part One: The War of Terrorists
Gemini’s response is an interesting read.
In his 2001 article, “The World After September 11 Part One: The War of Terrorists,” Mansoor Hekmat posited a world gripped by a conflict between “Two Reactionary Camps”: Western state terrorism led by the US, and Islamic terrorism. He argued that both sides used sophisticated propaganda to justify their power struggles, with neither genuinely concerned with the well-being of the people they claimed to represent.1 Hekmat asserted that the US sought to consolidate its global hegemony, while Islamic movements aimed to expand their influence within the Middle East’s bourgeois power structure. He contended that the “war on terror” would exacerbate existing issues like the Palestinian question and Islamic terrorism, rather than resolve them.
Fast forward to the present, and Hekmat’s analytical framework offers a chillingly prescient lens through which to view the latest escalation between Israel and Iran. While the direct actors have shifted, the underlying dynamics of two reactionary camps engaged in a power struggle, fueled by propaganda and with devastating consequences for ordinary people, remain eerily consistent.
The Latest War Between Israel and Iran: A Trajectory of Hekmat’s Analysis
The recent direct confrontation between Israel and Iran, while unprecedented in its overt nature, can be seen as a new chapter in the ongoing “war of terrorists” Hekmat described, albeit with updated players and narratives.
Two Reactionary Camps, Reconfigured:
- The Israeli State and its Western Allies: Israel, as Hekmat noted, remains a key component of the Western “state terrorism” camp. Its actions in Gaza, particularly since October 7th, 2023, have been widely condemned by international bodies and human rights organizations for their devastating impact on civilians.2 As of June 2024, the Gaza Health Ministry reports over 37,000 Palestinians killed, with a significant majority being women and children. This figure does not include those still buried under rubble. The UN reports that over 1.7 million people, or over 75% of Gaza’s population, have been displaced. The US continues to provide substantial military aid to Israel, with the Biden administration approving a $14.5 billion aid package in October 2023, further solidifying its role within Hekmat’s “enormous machinery of state terrorism and international intimidation.”3 The narrative propagated by this camp emphasizes Israel’s right to self-defense, the need to dismantle Hamas, and often frames the conflict as a struggle against Iranian-backed terrorism.
- The Islamic Republic of Iran and its Proxies: Iran, the “source of Islamic gangsterism” in Hekmat’s earlier assessment, now stands as a more direct and formidable pole of “Islamic terrorism.” While Hekmat initially focused on non-state actors like al-Qaeda, the Iranian state itself has increasingly embraced and operationalized a network of proxies across the Middle East, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, various Iraqi militias, the Houthis in Yemen, and to a significant extent, Hamas in Palestine. These groups, often armed and funded by Iran, engage in actions that can be classified as terrorism, targeting civilians and destabilizing the region.4 For instance, Hamas’s October 7th attacks killed approximately 1,200 Israelis, primarily civilians. The Houthis’ attacks on shipping in the Red Sea have disrupted global trade and escalated regional tensions.5 Iran’s propaganda centers on themes of resistance against Israeli occupation and US imperialism, the defense of Islamic holy sites, and the liberation of Palestine.
War Propaganda and the Erosion of Truth:
Hekmat’s insight into the sophisticated nature of war propaganda remains profoundly relevant.
- Western Narrative: The “war of civilised world against terrorism” has evolved. While the initial framing against al-Qaeda emphasized a global fight for freedom, the current discourse surrounding Israel and Iran often centers on Iran’s nuclear program, its destabilizing regional activities, and its support for “terrorist” proxies. The atrocities committed by Hamas are highlighted to justify Israeli actions, with less emphasis placed on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza or the historical context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This allows for the “full control of western public opinion” that Hekmat described, making it difficult for many to question the official narrative without appearing to condone terrorism.
- Iranian/Proxy Narrative: Similarly, the “anti-imperialist” defense of Islamic groups has intensified. Iran and its proxies frame their actions as legitimate resistance against an oppressive, apartheid Israeli state and a hegemonistic US. The suffering of Palestinians is consistently invoked to legitimize attacks on Israel, and any criticism of their methods is often dismissed as pro-Western bias or Zionist propaganda.6 This narrative, as Hekmat predicted, “can once again gain foothold among the people and political parties of the Middle East and also among sections of the traditional radical and intellectual Left of western societies.” The focus on victimhood and historical injustice allows for the rationalization of actions that might otherwise be seen as barbaric.
The Core Conflict: Power Struggle, Not People’s Well-being:
Hekmat’s most crucial assertion – that the conflict is fundamentally a power struggle rather than a genuine concern for the people – holds true.
- For Israel and its Allies: While national security is the stated primary objective, the actions undertaken serve to consolidate Israel’s regional dominance and maintain its strategic alignment with the US. The “resolution of the Palestinian question” remains elusive, and the intensified conflict only further entrenches the occupation and division. The military response in Gaza, for instance, has been criticized for its disproportionate impact and for not leading to a sustainable solution for security or peace.7
- For Iran and its Proxies: The recent direct attacks and continued proxy warfare are not about genuinely “ending discrimination against the Palestinian people” or bringing lasting peace to the Middle East. Instead, they are about expanding Iran’s sphere of influence, challenging the US-led regional order, and enhancing its standing as a major player in the Middle East. The suffering of the Palestinian people, while genuinely felt by many, is often instrumentalized as political capital for the Islamic movement to “further deepen the national, ethnic and religious splits” and perpetuate conflict for its own power. A true resolution of the Palestinian issue would, as Hekmat suggested, likely “herald the demise of the Islamic movement in the Middle East” as a primary political force.8
Conclusion:
Mansoor Hekmat’s analysis of “The World After September 11” provides a stark and enduring framework for understanding contemporary conflicts, even those that appear to have new dimensions. The “war of terrorists” he described has not ended; it has merely evolved, with Israel and Iran now standing as more direct, yet still fundamentally reactionary, poles. The cycle of violence, fueled by cynical power struggles and sophisticated propaganda, continues to inflict immense suffering on ordinary people. Hekmat’s call for an “independent popular movement against this unprecedented and deadly confrontation” and for exposing the “war propaganda and rationalisations dished out by belligerent camps” remains as urgent today as it was over two decades ago. Without a fundamental shift away from these deeply entrenched power dynamics, the trajectory of this “war of terrorists” promises only more bloodshed and instability in the Middle East and beyond.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of IranOnline.com.