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
