1. Our concise summary of the international political situation is:
Everything that happens in the world in the armed conflict between our hill and the enemy's hill inevitably leads to PEOPLE'S WAR, which is their response.
Quote to arm the mind and arm:
Study the quote from Chairman Gonzalo, which we titled LONG LIVE THE PARTY!! LONG LIVE THE PARTY!! LONG LIVE THE PARTY!!, which has great theoretical and practical importance for Maoists worldwide, because it highlights THE MAIN STRATEGIC TASK, BACKSIDE, of the constitution/reconstitution of Communist Parties to transform the various struggles taking place in the world today into democratic or socialist revolutions, as the case may be. The quote reads:
“LONG LIVE THE PARTY!! LONG LIVE THE PARTY!! LONG LIVE THE PARTY!!” *
„(...) a people's war, a revolutionary war, a just war, like ours, can only be led by a Communist Party and no one but a Communist Party, through its leaders, its cadres, its members; led, not waged, because the masses wage it, we know this well, because while we are clear that the Party is the light that pierces the shadows, the masses are the force, the lifeblood that transforms and changes everything, generating the dawn of a new era forever, we know this well We do. But this leads us to understand more and more, looking at our own history of this nation that we ourselves are forging, we see how this mass, orphaned of a Party, wanders aimlessly, incessantly engaged in battles, yes, shedding its blood because it has never stopped doing so and will continue to do so, comrades, the mass is the mass; but we know that without a Party, all that struggle of the mass, of the people, and of the glorious international proletariat of which we are a part, and the Peruvian proletariat is also a part, that without a Communist Party, without that axis, without that dynamizing, directing, guiding factor, nothing will be accomplished, everything will be crumbling, a house of cards, it will collapse, because if the mass has the strength, we have the direction, that is why the Party is the axis.”
(President Gonzalo, at the Inaugural Session of the First Congress of the PCP, February 1988)
* We have titled this quote with the slogan shouted by the President in the First Session of the First Congress, a voice like thunder, which transcends all borders to shake the world, serving the great Maoist upheaval and reminding us of the task that must be fulfilled to serve the world revolution.
2. Introduction (Part 2)
Here, we will present additional reports and articles from representatives and institutions, selected by us prior to the announcement of the “two-week ceasefire” by US President Donald Trump, the genocidal figure behind the conflict, on Tuesday, April 8, 2026, which was confirmed shortly thereafter by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. But first, let's look at two summaries from the newspaper El País on the outcome for each side of the conflict up to this point, which led to the truce and the negotiating table:
- “Quick Analysis | Trump Maintains Force; Iran, the Initiative
Forty days have passed since the US and Israeli militaries launched the strongest coordinated offensive to date against the Iranian regime, and two things seem clear: the threats from US President Donald Trump are still having an effect, both on the ground and in the markets, and Tehran, despite the damage suffered by its government leadership and military apparatus, is maintaining the initiative and is able to sit at the table without capitulating.
The Republican president, (...), placed the world on the brink this Tuesday. Either Tehran would reopen the strategic Strait of Hormuz, an essential waterway for hydrocarbon trade, or it would wipe Persian civilization off the map (...)
The threat of force had its effect, and with the mediation Pakistan's intervention brought Iranian authorities to the negotiating table in a race against time to halt the "hell" promised by Washington. But beyond the regime's total surrender, so desired by Trump, and the complete reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which has driven the price of a barrel of oil above $100, Tehran has agreed to a truce, but only to negotiate on its terms.
(...) in the negotiations, the mere fact that Tehran can put conditions on the table, such as the withdrawal of US troops from the region—unrealistic—control, in one way or another, of the Strait of Hormuz, or the lifting of sanctions, puts the regime in a position of strength, with maximum demands similar to those it offered before these 40 days of bombing.
And while the US military has hit 13,000 targets in these five and a half weeks of the campaign, it has dealt a heavy blow and decimated the regime's military capabilities, (...) while Israel was killing Despite the main political and military leaders, Tehran has been able to carefully manage its ammunition (launching more than 1,200 missiles and almost 4,000 drones at countries in the region) and launch staggered attacks. The downing of several US aircraft last week is clear evidence of this.
The offensive, therefore, after more than 5,000 deaths, mostly in Iran and Lebanon, has by no means achieved its objectives. Meanwhile, the regime, although weakened, has managed to keep its most powerful weapon virtually intact: the discretionary blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
(El País, 08/04/2026)
“Iran, a Pyrrhic truce for Trump”
Macarena Vidal Liy, Washington - April 8, 2026
US President Donald Trump has presented the two-week ceasefire agreement with Iran as a triumph. An achievement he describes in his characteristic style, with many capital letters and exclamation points. But, (...) what has been achieved so far is a Pyrrhic truce. Washington's great achievement is opening a maritime passage that wasn't closed before the start of its offensive; along the way, it has offended its allies and undermined its international image, depleted its ammunition stockpiles, and turned its public opinion against it.
In his announcement, Trump stated (...) "we have already more than met all our military objectives and are very far along in reaching a definitive agreement on a long-term peace."
The details, however, suggest that Tehran is the one who comes out on top. The talks, as Trump himself has admitted, will be based on the Islamic Republic's plan, not the United States' 15-point plan. It is also unclear on what terms Iran will open the Strait of Hormuz to maritime traffic.
Tehran
enters the truce with its enriched uranium underground, but intact.
The regime remains in power and in control of the country, no matter
how much the White House occupant insists (...), a Pyrrhic truce for
Trump.”
(El País, 08/04/2026)
Comment: As stated, the two articles are a summary that accurately reflects the situation of what has transpired in the war of aggression waged by US imperialism against the Iranian nation so far. They document the just and correct position of the MPP on this matter and serve as a guide for our reporting.
Yankee imperialism has failed in its main political objective in its war of aggression against Iran: regime change in an attempt to regain the control it lost over the country in 1978. Everything else is merely a false victory, leading to further failures for imperialism.
The articles in this continuation refer to the war in the Middle East, whose center is currently in the Persian Gulf, and address the development of the inter-imperialist contradiction (in collusion and conflict). They focus primarily on the armament of the Yankee, Russian, Chinese, and other imperialists. A sign of their inevitable collapse and downfall, the imperialists' armament is not a sign of strength but of weakness. They are following the path of all empires that have collapsed in the past, relying on weapons and not on the valor of their armies.
Maoism states that it is not weapons that are the decisive factor in war, but man. The current war, as we refer to its unfolding, confirms once again that the victories the imperialists proclaim are merely Pyrrhic.
The international proletariat and its Communist Parties possess a superior strategy: the people's war, mass warfare led by the Communist Party. The more the imperialists rely on their special forces, air and space warfare, AI warfare, and puppet and lackey troops, the further they distance themselves from the masses. And we know that with the masses and the Communist Party, all miracles can be achieved. To reiterate, without the Communist Party, it will be impossible to escape the "iron circle," despite all the heroism and the abundant sacrifice of the masses' generous blood, as world history, and especially the MOA, demonstrates.
The Communist Parties, following Chairman Mao, wage people's war with strategic guerrilla warfare to achieve democratic and socialist revolutions, to confront imperialist wars of aggression, and even imperialist world war, with global people's war.
3. ARTICLES FROM IMPERIALIST MEDIA
3.1 Leaders Say Nuclear Forces and Space Dominance Are Paramount to National Security
March 26, 2026 | By David Vergun, Pentagon News |
Protecting U.S. space systems is essential to national security because many military capabilities depend on them, including precision navigation, global communications, missile warning, and real-time intelligence, said Space Force General Stephen N. Whiting, commander of U.S. Space Command, who testified today in Washington before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Space systems were critical to mission success in recent operations, including Midnight Hammer, Absolute Resolve, and currently Epic Fury, he said.
"If an adversary degrades or destroys our space capabilities, the ability of the joint force to fight according to its size and design would be immediately and materially affected," Whiting said, adding that adversaries are moving at an alarming pace, developing and deploying capabilities to deny the Department of Defense the use of space.
China’s space presence has grown exponentially, operating more than 1,300 active satellites, a 667% increase since 2015, including more than 510 intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance satellites.
They are using these capabilities to integrate space-enabled military effects and deploy weapons designed to overcome and destroy U.S. satellites, he said.
Russia has capabilities designed to disrupt U.S. space assets, “including the potential placement of a nuclear weapon in orbit, the greatest threat to our space architecture,” Whiting said. “Armed conflict in space is not inevitable, but if deterrence fails, our team’s integrated space power will provide a decisive advantage.”
The general listed his top funding priorities for fiscal year 2027, which include deploying integrated space firepower, active satellite protection, improving battlespace awareness, building an integrated command and control system, and providing sufficient cyber defenses for space dominance.
(...)
Navy Admiral Richard A. Correll, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, who also testified today, said the nation's nuclear forces are the foundation of national security.
"Stratcom and its components are prepared, not seeking confrontation, but deterring strategic attacks and underpinning all operational plans of the War Department," the admiral said.
The challenge is deterring great power conflict and managing the complexities of deterring multiple nuclear adversaries simultaneously, while also adapting to rapid technological changes and advances, Correll said.
Some of those challenges include cyber threats, attacks against U.S. space capabilities, a contested electromagnetic spectrum, new enemy missile systems, and supply chain issues.
"As we bring the B-21 [Raider] bomber, the Columbia-class submarines, and the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile system into operation, we will ensure the credibility of our deterrence for decades to come," he said.
Comment: This Pentagon report relates to the first level of the inter-imperialist contradiction, which is currently being redefined and is manifested in how US imperialism seeks to maintain its position as the sole hegemonic superpower. The US imperialist war against Iran fuels this imperialist conflict. Strategic weapons plans are designed to maintain this advantage for decades, as we know from H. Kissinger himself in his two-volume memoirs (TYWH, 1978).
3.2 A decidedly non-European struggle over European defense
Andrés Ortega | March 3, 2026
The serious tension between France and Germany over national dominance in European defense is reflected in their differences regarding the future fighter jet, the war with Iran, and the military industry. The French nuclear offer will not suffice.
France and Germany claim to want a “strong” and “bold” Europe in military terms. Macron even proposes extending France's nuclear deterrent to other European countries, although the decision on its use would always remain in France's hands—as it must. However, both countries are fiercely competing to see who leads the "Europe of defense," which, in industrial terms, is meant to replace the "Green Europe" launched four years ago.
The power struggles over technological control of the future FCAS fighter jet—a moribund, though not dead, project—reflect the limits of European integration, especially between Paris and Berlin, its essential axis. Faced with the war between Trump and Netanyahu—or vice versa—with Iran, Europeans are divided. Merz supports it; Macron, only partially; Starmer has limited US use of the joint Diego Garcia base; and Sánchez stands out for his clear opposition. Among the 27 member states, there is more than just a few nuances.
European defense is more necessary than ever given the United States, on which it still depends, but which has ceased to be reliable, even though it remains indispensable. Neither Paris nor Berlin were informed beforehand of the US and Israeli attack on Iran. They haven't dared to criticize it openly, and after the Iranian attacks on French and British bases in the region, both countries are showing themselves prepared for defensive military action. The repressive and destabilizing regime of the ayatollahs was dangerous and unpopular. And these Europeans don't feel strong enough to confront Trump on every issue either.
Regarding the next generation of air combat systems—one of the pillars of European defense and technology for the end of the next decade—there are three programs in Europe. The FCAS (Future Combat Air System), on which Airbus Defence and Space, Indra, Thales, and Dassault are working. The GCAP (Global Combat Air Programme), driven by the United Kingdom, Italy, and Japan. And the Swedish company Saab, which is developing advanced versions of the JAS 39 Gripen. Three distinct projects. The United States, for its part, has two: the NGAD – from the Air Force – and the F/A-XX – a future naval fighter. Neither is a simple aircraft: all are integrated systems with companion drones and digital combat clouds.
The FCAS – still without a catchy name – was initially conceived with a 33% share for France, Germany, and Spain. But France – and Dassault in particular – is unwilling to share its technology, especially the key flight control systems it has been perfecting for two decades, and wants to lead the project. Neither the President of the Republic – nor his predecessors – seems able or willing to sway the will of the head of this strategic undertaking. Eric Trappier has declared that, if there is no agreement, “we know how to do it on our own.” And they can. They proved it with the Rafale, despite US pressure. On his last trip to India, Macron finalized an agreement to sell 114 units, with some manufacturing taking place there.
There is also a strategic issue raised by Merz himself: (...) The autonomy of the systems has become a central debate (...) fully autonomous weapons systems.
Beyond that, Merz believes that the defense industry and rearmament are key to pulling the German economy out of the stagnation it faces in the face of Chinese competition. It's a more national than European push, or, if you prefer, the Europe of nation-states is gaining ground. Germany is betting on an air defense based on American and Israeli systems, closing the door on the Franco-British-Italian alternative. And it prefers to develop its own satellite communications system to replace Starlink, rather than commit to a fully European one.
Thus, we are witnessing a power struggle between France and Germany that is not particularly pro-European, though very much European. The United Kingdom is no longer in the EU, but its military weight remains decisive. In Paris—and also in Warsaw—Merz's aims to make the Bundeswehr "the most powerful army in Europe" have been poorly received. German rearmament, supported by its own industry, is arousing suspicion. In Poland, there are concerns that a substantial portion of the SAFE loans—€150 billion in total, of which €44 billion could be allocated to Poland—will end up being used for purchases from Germany. Meanwhile, needing fighter jets until the future system arrives, Merz has opted for the American F-35s, which Sánchez has rejected for Spain.
It is worth remembering that between 2021 and 2025, France became the fourth-largest investor in the world in terms of industrial investment—with initiatives projected until 2030—behind only the United States—which has registered spectacular growth—China, and India.
(...) In the EU, the Franco-German axis was—and remains—essential.
(...) Last Monday, in the midst of the crisis in the Middle East and one day after the joint declaration by the so-called E3—France, Germany, and the United Kingdom—on Iran, Macron delivered a speech at the strategic Long Island base in Brest. There, he announced that he would allow his allies to “participate in nuclear deterrence exercises,” which could involve the deployment of “French strategic forces” on their territory. Paris and Berlin had already begun discussing expanding French nuclear coverage in light of the uncertainty generated by the United States under Trump. Now they have announced the creation of a high-level nuclear steering group. A December poll indicated that 64% of the French public supports this approach.
Eight European countries—the United Kingdom, Germany, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Greece, Sweden, and Denmark—have agreed to participate in this “advanced deterrence.” Spain, at least under Sánchez, remains on the sidelines, consistent with the terms of the 1986 referendum. Although the international context is very different today.
France will increase the number of nuclear warheads—currently around 290—to have more options in case of escalation, although it will no longer publicly disclose the figures. “Deterrence must remain a French intangible,” Macron stated. The planning and final decision on their use will remain exclusively in France's hands. Decisions cannot be made by majority vote or unanimously. Furthermore, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom will work together on very long-range missile projects within the framework of ELSA (European Long Range Strike Approach). Against whom? It wasn't stated, but it is understood to be in response to potential Russian blackmail or nuclear attack.
It is a crucial issue for Europe, one that reinforces the strategic weight of France—and, to a lesser extent, the United Kingdom. Will it be credible? In light of all the above, that remains to be seen. The speech was planned before the attack by Israel and the US. Except for the feeling of European isolation, it hardly seemed the most appropriate moment. Macron, however, decided not to postpone it amidst great regional, global, and European uncertainty, when some of Trump's allies are already speaking of a "pathetic Europe." (Article translated from the English version of the Internationale Politik Quarterly (IPQ) website.)
Additional information about the article:
Gripen developed by Saab (Swedish imperialism)
“We developed the Gripen E/F to counter and defeat the most advanced threats in the modern battlespace, and to continually evolve as new challenges arise. We built an intelligent combat system that rapidly adopts new technologies and tactics to ensure users have superior air power.
The Gripen is an interoperable, multi-role fighter capable of successfully performing air-to-air and air-to-ground missions, as well as specialized intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance roles. The Gripen offers high combat performance, is cost-effective, and has a low logistical footprint.”
Comment: This article also refers to the current imperialist war of aggression against the Iranian nation, which fuels the imperialist conflict, hence its inclusion in our selection. The article reflects the collusion and struggle between second-tier imperialists and the superpower. The sole hegemonic imperialist power is the USA; likewise, the second-level inter-imperialist contradiction, which also unfolds amidst collusion and struggle, demonstrates that the EU imperialist alliance is aimed at vying for global hegemony, but that the struggle between them underlies it, because the struggle is absolute and the collusion is relative.
Furthermore, in the preceding articles, as well as in the one that follows, one can see how the imperialists are preparing for a third world war, which will occur when they are in a position to wage it. At the moment, they are not; they are all experiencing serious problems.
And yet, the balance of strategic arms between the big dog (USA) and the skinny dog (Russia) is maintained. Strategic balance does not mean parity of forces, because the USA has the advantage and seeks to maintain it. Social-imperialist China is making great strides in its armament, but it has not yet reached the level of an atomic superpower, like the two previously mentioned. However, the danger of a third world war remains. Imperialist exploitation is present at any of the flashpoints of the current situation. The question for revolutionaries is not whether this will happen or not, but rather how to make the revolution through people's war; this is the only way to be prepared for any eventuality.
FINALLY: Without further comment for now, we include a commentary that appeared in the New Zurich Zeitung (NZZ):
3.3 NZZ Geopolitics: Understanding the Big Picture: "The US attack on Iran weakens Beijing's political influence, not only in the Middle East"
Lukas Fierz, March 11, 2026
What hasn't Xi Jinping done in recent years to draw Iran into China's orbit? Two years ago, the Chinese head of state and party ensured the country's admission to the BRICS alliance. In the summer of 2023, Iran, also at Xi's urging, joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), a Chinese-backed security alliance initially composed mainly of Central Asian countries.
In 2021, Beijing and Tehran signed an investment agreement. Under this agreement, China plans to invest $400 billion in Iran. Iran is China's most important partner in the Middle East.
However, following the assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei by the United States, the future of relations is now more than uncertain. Depending on how Iran handles the succession, Beijing could lose a key partner. This would also have consequences for Beijing's position in the struggle for global geopolitical power.
A phone call between Wang Yi and Sergey Lavrov
As expected, the Chinese government expressed its outrage at the US attack on Iran. "China strongly condemns the attack and the assassination of the Iranian leader," a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry announced on Sunday. The spokesperson stated that hostilities must cease immediately. The United States had not informed China in advance of the impending attack.
Earlier, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had spoken by phone with his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov. The top Chinese diplomat called for an immediate return to dialogue and negotiations during the conversation. Lavrov seconded this request, adding that such talks should take place, among other things, within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO).
However, this demand is unrealistic, since, despite Xi Jinping's expansion to include new members, the SCO remains an organization without real power. Key states involved in the Middle East conflict, such as Israel and the United States, are not SCO members.
Other countries are likely to doubt China's reliability.
Therefore, China remains on the sidelines of the conflict. Beijing plays no role, neither as an actor nor as a mediator*. This occurs despite China's success in expanding its influence in the region in recent years. Two years ago, for example, China orchestrated the establishment of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran. With this action, Beijing gained prestige and an advantage in the geopolitical struggle with its rival, the United States.
For Xi Jinping, the escalation in the Middle East is extremely delicate. Other emerging and developing countries, with which the Chinese leader has strengthened ties in recent years, are likely wondering what benefits this closeness to Beijing will bring them in the event of a crisis, especially in the face of a potential threat from the United States. Even Russia might question China's reliability as a partner.
China is likely to lose the opportunity to access cheap oil from Iran.
The war in the Middle East is also having an economic impact on China. The Asian giant obtains thirteen percent of its oil imports from Iran.
The disruption of Iranian oil supplies will likely hurt China not only because of the large volume, but also because Beijing obtained the oil at low prices, circumventing US sanctions. China paid Iran for the raw material in Chinese yuan. With this currency, the isolated country acquired consumer goods, cars, trucks, and machinery in China. The war in Iran is therefore hindering the internationalization of the Chinese currency, which the Chinese government is promoting.
The war also poses significant logistical challenges for China.
Iran is at the center of a trade route that Beijing has been developing in recent years as an alternative to the Strait of Malacca. This new network includes the Strait of Hormuz, the extension of the Iran-Pakistan pipeline, and the Iranian oil terminal at Jask.
In essence, there is only one scenario in which China would emerge stronger from the war. If the conflict drags on and US allies in the Middle East suffer heavy losses due to Iranian bombing, Xi could portray the US president as a ruthless warmonger. If US resources and attention remain focused on the Middle East, China will have greater freedom to pursue its objectives in the Indo-Pacific.
Alicia García Herrero, of Natixis Research in Hong Kong, writes: “Xi could make Trump pay for his restraint in the Middle East crisis.” This could happen, for example, if the US, in return, refrains from intervening in a potential escalation of the Taiwan conflict, the analyst suggests. The White House recently announced plans to postpone a $13 billion arms deal with the island. Trump said he had discussed the matter with Xi.”
* OUR NOTE: The USA has recognized China's mediating role in supporting Pakistan at the Islamabad negotiating table.
Feedback geben