Workers of the world, unite!
STATEMENT:
THE IRANIAN PEOPLE'S WAR OF NATIONAL RESISTANCE WILL DEFEAT THE IMPERIALIST-ZIONIST WAR OF AGGRESSION
YANKEES GO HOME!
On
Saturday, February 28, the war of aggression waged by Yankee
imperialism and its main instrument in the Middle East region, the
Zionist State of Israel, entered a new military campaign within the
phase of the war that began with its first 12-day campaign in June 2025.
This
campaign of direct military aggression against the Islamic Republic of
Iran, which the imperialist aggressor has dubbed "Operation Epic Fury,"
has as its main political objective the capitulation of the Iranian
nation in order to subject it to imperialist domination.
As
reported by the media, the United States and Israel have been attacking
Iran since Saturday morning, resulting in the death of the country's top
leader, Ali Khamenei.
By Sunday, the aggressors' armed forces, according to their own information, had bombed more than 2,000 targets in Iran.
Iran stated that "the assassination of Khamenei signifies a declaration of war against Muslims."
US
imperialism, as the principal enforcer of the global
counter-revolution, seeks to resolve the "Iran question" (its main
political objective) by pursuing regime change in the Islamic Republic
of Iran.
The Iranian question is the key issue to be resolved in
the Greater Middle East (MEE) for the plans of the sole hegemonic
superpower, US imperialism, as President Gonzalo states:
“Iran,
subjugated by the Shah, was a US stronghold; he was overthrown and a
retrograde theocratic system was imposed, controlled by Shiite Islam,
thus clashing with the superpowers USA and USSR, and with the so-called
“third Satan,” Hussein of Iraq. The US lost its stronghold in the Middle
East; Israel is very small, however much of a wedge it represents; for
this reason, it supported Iraq in its war against Iran (…) For the
imperialists, control of the Middle East is at stake.”
The
campaign for this imperialist war of aggression began with a preparatory
phase aimed at creating favorable public opinion both domestically and
internationally. This involved fabricating a narrative (Iran as a
“threat to the security of the United States and Israel due to its
development of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles”) and preparing
by deploying a large military force in the region to direct the forces
of its Zionist and reactionary Arab lackeys. The concentration of
American forces is the largest since the Gulf War, with the US
repeatedly proclaiming itself “the most powerful military force on
earth” (Trump).
Since Saturday, a devastating imperialist air
bombardment by its Zionist lackeys against thousands of targets has been
underway, but it demonstrates the great capacity of the Iranian
resistance, primarily that of its people, and the difficulties the
imperialists are encountering in subduing a nation they thought would
surrender in a matter of days.
The Yankee imperialists have been
confronted with reality, as the resistance not only persists but is
growing, and the expected "popular uprising" against the regime has not
occurred and, as we can see, will not occur.
Regarding the above,
Nate Swanson, Director of the Iran Strategic Project at the Atlantic
Council in Washington, D.C., stated in an interview with the German
magazine Der Stern that, following the death of Iran's top leader, Ali
Khamenei, this war is historically unparalleled and clarified how Iran's
revenge might unfold—and how Donald Trump could once again end this
war. (www.stern.de)
The reaction of rival imperialists from
Russia, China, France, Germany, etc., despite their differing tones,
consisted of hypocritical calls for respect for international law and
for "peaceful solutions through diplomatic negotiations." All of this is
aimed at undermining anti-imperialist resistance and forcing the
attacked nation to capitulate.
The genocidal Trump, the State
Department, the CIA, and the Pentagon, as well as his lackey Netanyahu,
Mossad, and the Zionist Armed Forces, dreamed of a victory. The attack
was swift but shattered by the fierce resistance and counterattack of
Iranian patriotic forces, the "Axis of Resistance" movements, and the
mass movements of the region, stretching from Pakistan to the Sahara.
The Iranian armed forces counterattacked, inflicting casualties and
destroying or seriously damaging facilities at US bases and those of
other imperialist countries in the region, which are governed by lackeys
of US imperialism.
The US imperialists seek to create a power
vacuum through the assassinations of Supreme Leader Khamenei and nearly
50 of the country's top political and military leaders, as well as
through the bombing of civilian and military government installations,
and the country's logistics and economy. They aim to decimate the vital
forces of national resistance. The aggressor intends to force the regime
to capitulate to all its demands and, at the same time, generate a
"popular uprising" in favor of a puppet government of US
imperialism—whether that of the deposed Shah's son, Rerza Pahlavi, or
any other traitor. The latter would allow them to enter with their
ground forces, overthrow the national government, and install their
puppet.
REALITY AND PERSPECTIVE:
We believe
that what has been presented corresponds to the reality of what is
happening in the current armed conflict between U.S. imperialism, on the
one hand, and the oppressed nation of Iran, on the other. Therein lies
the principal contradiction, and its importance will increase despite
the prospect of intensifying collusion and struggle between superpowers
and other powers.
The imperialist-Zionist plan seeks a swift resolution; a prolonged war is not in its best interest.
A
prolonged war is advantageous to the forces of national resistance and
the entire national liberation movement in the region, allowing them to
move from weakness to strength.
This requires Iran to commit to a
firm and astute resistance aimed at generating political changes,
primarily among the Arab people, and exacerbating inter-imperialist
contradictions.
For us, this is the most convenient way to
transform national resistance into revolution, because in this armed
struggle, the heroic combatant who must lead the armed struggle of
national resistance will emerge and be forged, transforming it into a
people's war under the leadership of their Communist Party, as part of
the revolution of new democracy.
We understand that the
anti-imperialist front in our countries is the front of the democratic
revolution based on the worker-peasant alliance led by the Communist
Party. Marxist-Leninist-Maoists do not separate the struggle against
imperialism from the struggle against semi-feudalism and bureaucratic
capitalism.
And the world anti-imperialist front to sweep
imperialism and reaction from the face of the earth through world
revolution is made up of two forces: the struggle of the national
liberation movement and the struggles of the international proletarian
movement, both led by their Communist Parties. Although for the communists the motto is "Proletarians of all countries, unite!" ,
the motto that must guide the struggle of the two forces must be
"Proletarians of all the countries and peoples of the world, unite!"
We also declare our support for the call to found the Anti-Imperialist League, and we quote the following from its call:
"The
conditions are favorable for uniting the majority of the people against
the imperialists and their lackeys. We call for the founding of an
International Anti-Imperialist Organization, the International
Anti-Imperialist League, to undertake the indispensable task of forming a
world anti-imperialist front to advance along the path of unifying the
majority of the people against imperialism and reaction, in service of
the People's Wars, the national liberation struggles, and the
proletarian and popular struggles throughout the world. Let us found the International Anti-Imperialist League!"
To
conclude, a lesson that Chairman Gonzalo drew from the 1990 Gulf War,
especially for oppressed nations and primarily for the world proletarian
revolution, which must be kept in mind in the face of this uninspiring
event, is the following:
“Thus, they extol American military
power to the skies, 'in the highest and most modern technology'; and
what does the commentary say? 'It's a rehash of the idea that weapons
are the most important thing, that power resides in the most modern
weapons, that weapons can do everything, that's what they proclaim; and
it concludes: 'When, precisely, the first great lesson we must draw from
the Gulf War is that what is most important in war is the man, the
ideology that animates him, the class that leads, the interests he
defends, and the cause he serves.' That is the lesson of the Gulf and
what interests us as a lesson for people's war and for unmasking
fallacies (1)."
Let us found the International Anti-Imperialist League!
Yankees out of the Greater Middle East!
Let's support the National Resistance War of the people of Iran!
Iran and Palestine will prevail!
March 2026
MPP: NOTES TO THE DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF THE IRANIAN PEOPLE
Workers of the world, unite!
NOTES TO THE DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF THE IRANIAN PEOPLE
In these notes, we add some points to clarify certain aspects of our DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF THE IRANIAN PEOPLE (published on March 7, 2026) and to address the current situation of the war, more precisely the current military campaign of US imperialism and its vassal, the Zionist State of Israel (the aggressor power), and the counter-military campaign of Iran (the oppressed country under attack). With regard to these issues, we clearly state our position:
1. The main contradiction and the oppressed nations are the basis of the world revolution. The center of the conflict in the Middle East has shifted to the Persian Gulf.
The center of the war between imperialism and the oppressed countries of the Middle East has shifted to Iran. Following the same axis, its center has shifted from Palestine (Gaza) to Iran, which is waging a war of national resistance, a just war.
The imperialist-Zionist war of aggression is part of the general counterrevolutionary offensive led by U.S. imperialism, which targets oppressed nations, the foundation of the world revolution.
It expresses the primary and principal contradiction, that is, between oppressed nations on one side, and superpowers and imperialist powers on the other. This contradiction is resolved through a Democratic Revolution, which DEMANDS a People's War. With a People's War, the revolutionary Marxist-Leninist-Maoist counteroffensive unfolds, which DEMANDS a Communist Party to lead it.
In this war of aggression by U.S. imperialism and its current genocidal military campaign, the third contradiction, which is inter-imperialist, is also being expressed at its second level. The first level is between superpowers, and this level is being redefined.
The contradiction surrounding the spoils of Iran, in this case, lies between the sole hegemonic superpower, Yankee imperialism, and the imperialist powers, which, depending on their alignment with the former, are grouped into vassals and vandals or barbarians.
The region's lackeys governments have aligned themselves with imperialist-Zionist aggression.
The oil from the Persian Gulf goes to Europe, China, Japan, India, among others. It has a strong impact on the world economy, which relies on 20% of its refined oil and 20% of its liquefied natural gas from these countries. Therefore, the struggle is clearly about division.
The military conflict has as its primary objectives for the contenders: control of the Strait of Hormuz and the security of the region's oil fields.
Collusion and Imperialist Struggle
To stabilize the global oil market, US imperialism has suspended sanctions on crude oil sales to Russian imperialism, thereby also seeking to separate Russian imperialism from Iran. The war in Iran benefits Russian imperialism because prices also rise, and US imperialist attention shifts from Ukraine to the Gulf.
China, due to its dependence on supplies from the region, is at the mercy of the war's development and its outcomes. Much of the oil it imports from Iran and other Gulf countries passes through the Strait of Hormuz and, to a lesser extent, through the Saudi pipeline that reaches the Red Sea.
The issue of the security of oil, gas, and other derivative production for industry and human consumption, as well as their transport, is being used by the warring parties for their own purposes. It is a problem for both sides, related to managing the contradictions they face. The Yankee imperialists intend to score a victory by aiming for the military occupation of the key island for controlling maritime passage through the Strait, Kahrgan Island.
This is a region that has been in dispute since the end of the 19th century with the collapse and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire (1).
2. The relationship between politics, economics, and war
The last part of the previous point leads us to examine the relationship between politics, economics, and war. It is not only a matter of oil; the underlying problem that has remained unresolved since 1979 is that whoever advances and controls Iran secures and dominates the Middle East, and therefore a key region for the world economy and of great strategic importance because three continents converge at the MOA. This is the strategic objective of the war and the current military campaign, which is why we have included Chairman Gonzalo's quote on this matter in our Declaration.
It is important to be clear on this point, starting from a historical analysis of the specific situation in the MOA and the relationship between politics, economics, and war. This STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE OF AMERICAN IMPERIALISM in its war of aggression, in collusion and conflict with other imperialist powers, finds its concrete expression in REGIME CHANGE IN IRAN.
If they do not achieve this main strategic objective in their war of aggression, even if they achieve some successes in what Trump and Netanyahu have called their “strategic military objectives,” they will have failed in their war of aggression. Therefore, taking stock of the war's progress so far, we say that they are failing and have become bogged down in their war, which is now approaching three weeks.
Therefore: it's not that the imperialists lack a clear strategy, but rather that they fail repeatedly despite all their military might, despite all the genocide they unleash. The Iranian regime, which is leading the war of national resistance against the imperialist-Zionist war of aggression, has not capitulated. The enemy is facing a stalemate in the current war, just as it did in its previous wars this century.
They thought it would be easy, that they could repeat the false success of Venezuela with the regime's capitulation, but they were sorely mistaken. Within the resistance leadership, those who advocate national capitulation to imperialism have been crushed.
The genocidal Donald Trump has declared: "Now we don't know anyone, there's no one to talk to." Although Trump and Netanyahu have proclaimed their "military victory," they say the military campaign will continue until all "strategic military objectives" are achieved. But if war is the continuation of politics by other means, then if they fail in their political objective of the war, they will reap the consequences of their military failure nonetheless.
Therefore, US strategists are discussing rethinking the next steps in their military campaign in the face of a possible entry into a new phase of the war, involving the deployment of ground forces, which would be very limited and dangerous for Trump since he lacks domestic support. This includes what they have planned from the beginning: the use of mercenaries from the region as "boots on the ground," as we will see in point 5. At this point, the revolutionary character of some national movements, such as Iran, Palestine, and others, and the reactionary character of other "national movements" become clear. When the proletarian element is not present through its Communist Party, it is always a concrete and relative problem, which answers the question: do they serve to weaken or strengthen the imperialist front?
Once again, we reiterate what was stated in the Declaration: it is proven that the most important thing in war is not weapons, but man.
3. Yankee imperialism is beset by insurmountable internal and external contradictions. It needs to resort to troops from its vassals and lackeys.
Yankee imperialism is sinking in a long process, like all empires of the past. New imperialisms are emerging to challenge it; some fall behind, while others enter an upward trajectory but are threatened by bankruptcy.
Imperialism is in the process of its collapse and being swept away by the world revolution. Imperialism is the stage of the general crisis of capitalism, which stems from its economic essence: monopoly. It is monopolistic, parasitic, or decaying and dying. Yankee imperialism is in a more advanced state of decay than its rivals.
The Yankee imperialists, the sole hegemonic imperialist superpower, thought the time had come to advance and seize Iran with their current military campaign in their imperialist war of aggression, assisted by their vassal, the Zionist state of Israel. But as we are seeing, it has gone from failure to failure.
The collapse of the regime, followed by the internal subversion that would have been provoked by their deluge of fire, destruction, and death, has not materialized. Clearly, a country is not conquered from the air or the sea; it requires "boots on the ground." For this, they planned to use their special forces to support internal subversion, which would be joined by mercenary forces of Iranian Kurdish minority stationed in Erbil, the so-called Iraqi Kurdistan. An Iranian rocket recently killed a French imperialist officer in Erbil who had been training them. The alternative of using US troops to conquer the country is not viable due to time constraints and the political situation in the US, as this option would require deploying between 200,000 and 300,000 soldiers. They say: “a limited and dangerous option for Trump due to the political situation in the country” (information on this matter in point 5).
Imperialism is not only beset by external contradictions, but also by its own internal contradictions, such as the contradiction with the other imperialist faction, on the one hand, and the antagonistic internal contradiction with the proletariat and the American people, on the other.
The vassal imperialists are unwilling to come to its aid because they also face similar problems. Furthermore, Merz, Macron, etc., say that this “is not their war,” that they were not consulted beforehand, and therefore would not have a significant share of the “fruits of victory.” So, with elections looming and the danger of losing, they are not willing to risk so much for so little.
Through this contradiction among those at the top, one sees, as if through a window, the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in imperialist countries. That is why they need to centralize the power of the imperialist state absolutely, whether through presidential absolutism or fascism; these are the two forms that the reactionary nature of the bourgeois state takes. We exploit their contradictions, but we are not in favor of aligning ourselves with any of their factions. We are for the destruction of the bourgeois state through people's war; with it, we will crush fascism. The opposite leads to the defense of bourgeois democracy.
They thought that by subjecting the country to intense bombing and barbaric genocide, the regime would crumble and that the people of Iran would rise up, believing that "the moment of their liberation" had arrived, as Trump and Netanyahu shouted at the top of their lungs. But they were wrong. Neither has happened, and the internal front, the national front against Zionist imperialist aggression, remains.
4. STRATEGIC AND PROBLEM OF PRINCIPLES: Who is the main enemy of the Iranian nation in the current situation?
Yankee imperialism is the main enemy of the peoples of the world and specifically of the oppressed nations of the Middle East. Imperialism is not singular; to consider it as such is Kautskyism, pure right-wing ideology. The contradictions between imperialists function as reserve forces of the revolution (Lenin).
The regime that heads the State of Iran, despite its character as a Muslim theocracy, led by the Shiite cleric Khamenei, has come to lead a just war.
The fact noted above expresses the dual nature of the class that governs this landowning-bureaucratic state, which, in the face of imperialist aggression, can be part of the national front, as in this case, forming part of the Iranian nation.
The struggle of the Ayatollah of Iran and his supporters for national resistance against the imperialist war of aggression, for the defense of their country's sovereignty and formal independence, is an objectively revolutionary struggle because it weakens imperialism, disintegrates it, and undermines it. Since they are opposed to the New Democratic Revolution and its uninterrupted march toward socialism (due to its dual nature), they function as reserve forces of the world revolution.
Therefore, the problem of Iran's national resistance war at the present moment is that its development into a revolution—a New Democratic Revolution against imperialism, bureaucratic capitalism, and semi-feudalism, to continue its uninterrupted march toward socialist revolution—requires proletarian leadership through its Communist Party, which must transform this struggle into a people's war. This is the condition for the victorious development of the new great wave of the world revolution.
The foregoing is of paramount importance not only for the national resistance struggles of Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, and the entire region, but also for the world revolution to sweep imperialism and reaction from the face of the earth.
Therefore, the positioning of parties, movements, and any other forces in Iran or the region determines their class character; that is, whether they are national movements serving the liberation of oppressed peoples and thus the world revolution, or whether they are “national movements” serving as outposts of the most dangerous enemy in the East.
5. The Reactionary Character of a “National Movement”
The comrades of Dem Volken Dienen (Serving the People) recently published an article by “Komalah: The Interests of the USA and Israel in Iran and the Kurds,” which, according to them, originated from the German blog “maoistdazibao.” We wish to highlight only the central information it contains, which is:
“There are reports (in the media) that the United States and Israel would enlist the armed forces of certain Kurdish parties to use them as troops on the ground against the Islamic Republic. According to American and Israeli officials, as well as some political sources, a plan is being considered whereby the armed forces of Kurdish parties from the Kurdistan region would march into Iranian Kurdistan and take control of part of that region.”
This means that a plan originating from the Israeli government and Mossad has been proposed and subsequently adopted by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). There are also reports of contacts and conversations between US officials and some leaders of the Kurdish coalition parties. According to this plan, the armed forces of these parties would be used as ground troops to carry out the political and military objectives of the US and Israel.
The article also mentions two historical examples of the use of Kurdish armed forces in the development of imperialist aggression in the region, citing the Gulf War of 1990-91 and, more recently, the imperialists' use of the Kurdish movement in Syria.
Regarding the fundamental issue raised in this information, we wish to clearly state our position:
To evaluate the preceding information, we maintain that the position of parties, movements, and any other forces in Iran or the region determines their class character; that is, whether they are national movements serving the liberation of oppressed peoples and thus the world revolution, or whether they are “national movements” serving as outposts for the most dangerous enemy in the East.
“The national question is part of the general question of the proletarian revolution, part of the question of the dictatorship of the proletariat (…)
Hence the necessity for the proletariat of the “imperial” nations to decisively and energetically support the national liberation movement of oppressed peoples. and dependents.
This does not mean, of course, that the proletariat must support every national movement, always and everywhere, in each and every specific case. The point is to support national movements aimed at weakening imperialism, at overthrowing it, and not at strengthening and maintaining it. There are cases in which the national movements of certain oppressed countries clash with the interests of the development of the proletarian movement. It goes without saying that in such cases one cannot even speak of support (…)
In the 1940s, Marx defended the national movements of the Poles and Hungarians against the national movements of the Czechs and South Slavs. Why? Because the Czechs and South Slavs were then considered "reactionary peoples," "Russian outposts" in Europe, bastions of absolutism, while the Poles and Hungarians were "revolutionary peoples" fighting against absolutism. Supporting the national movements of the Czechs and South Slavs meant indirectly supporting Tsarism, the most dangerous enemy of the revolutionary movement in Europe.
The various demands of democracy—says Lenin—including that of self-determination, are not absolute, but rather a part of the entire global democratic (today, socialist) movement. It may happen that, in a given case, a part contradicts the whole; Therefore, it must be discarded (see Vol. XIX, pp. 257-258).
Thus arises the question of the various national movements, and of their possibly reactionary character, provided, of course, that they are not approached from a formal point of view, from the point of view of abstract rights, but on a concrete level, from the point of view of the interests of the revolutionary movement.”
J. Stalin. The Foundations of Leninism, VI The National Question
With this quote from Stalin, we conclude this additional note.
(1)
What does US strategic doctrine understand by regional equilibrium in the Greater Middle East?
Recall that the strategic orientation of US imperialism in the 1960s for nuclear and conventional warfare was called the 1 1/2 strategy. This strategy considered the USSR and China as a single bloc, with the Middle East as the buffer zone. The balance of power in this zone was determined by four powers, with the US and the USSR acting as the arbiters of this regional equilibrium. From 1970 onward, with the Nixon administration, the strategic orientation of the Americans for theaters of war changed, becoming known as the 2 1/2 strategy. This strategy considered the USSR and China separately, not as a single bloc. That is, if one of them went to war with the US, it did not automatically mean that the other would also do so.
The Scenario Of lesser strategic importance, the middle ground is the Middle East, and considerations of its balance are maintained. It is clear that during the 1970s, this balance tilted in favor of US dominance. However, in 1979, a new power entered the picture when the US "lapdog," the Shah of Iran, was overthrown, and the US lost control of the country, which became the Islamic Republic of Iran. The new Shiite regime questioned the role of the superpowers in the regional balance, primarily affecting the dominance of US imperialism and questioning the existence of the State of Israel.
When the new US National Security Strategy refers to restoring the regional balance, it is referring to the need for US imperialism to regain the control of Iran lost in 1979 and establish a regional balance among the powers of the region under the arbitration of the single hegemonic superpower. This concept of "balance" comes from the European balance of power of the 19th century up to the First World War, which had the imperialist superpower as its arbiter. England.
Peru People’s Movement
March 2026