Vanessa Beeley and I dive deep into the ocean of geopolitics in 2026, particularly analyzing two seemingly disconnected but strategically linked crises: Peru’s fraught presidential election and Iran’s fragile ceasefire with the United States of Epstein.
I’m currently on the ground in Lima, Peru, where I’ve witnessed massive democratic disarray with a still undecided first round of elections for President, along with the election for representatives or diputados and senate. Delayed ballot deliveries under the oversight of the ONPE, missing voting materials, and widespread accusations of fraud have left the country’s poorest communities feeling disenfranchised. Rising crime, much of it tied to extortion gangs, has been number one on people’s minds and has resolutely shifted working-class voters toward right-wing “law and order” candidates in the mold of Bukele or Milei. Meanwhile, a smaller but more politically aware electorate has moved left, creating a tense standoff that threatens to further destabilize one of South America’s most resource-rich nations—where the riches often go abroad and to multinational corporations.
The electoral chaos serves a larger U.S. strategy to secure control over Latin America’s lithium, gold, and silver reserves amid intensifying competition with China especially in the turn towards A.I and tech surveillance. Peru’s elites have long partnered with these multinational corporations, while Chinese firms have built critical infrastructure like the $3 billion Chancay Port, creating jobs and winning local favor. Unlike Chile, where American cultural and economic influence has turned cities into extensions of Miami, Peru still retains a more distinct identity—though that is changing rapidly. I believe based on what’s happened in Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Bolivia, and El Salvador, that a victory for right-wing candidates like Keiko Fujimori or “Porky” Aliaga would effectively hand the United States a new beachhead for resource extraction. Peru’s sovereign future hangs in the balance, with protest movements and indigenous resistance offering the only remaining checks on full-force foreign domination.
We then pivot to West Asia, focusing on China and Russia’s recent votes at the UN Security Council regarding Iran. Vanessa highlighted that Beijing and Moscow abstained from a Bahraini-led resolution condemning Iran’s self-defense actions but vetoed a separate measure to protect shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. From our vantage point, this was no act of altruism but a calculated defense of national interest: China benefits directly from Iranian-controlled oil flows and has no desire to see international patrols complicate its energy security. Iran has begun pricing oil sales in yuan and shifting payment locations to Chinese territory, further entwining the two economies. The takeaway is that neither China nor Russia should be romanticized as anti-imperialist saviors acting on altruistic ideals but as economically astute pragmatic players who act when their own assets are at stake—which is why we look at their actions rather than diplomatic words for analysis.
The conversation then turned to Iran’s ceasefire strategy, which we both view with deep skepticism but understand we don’t know exactly what Iran may be thinking and provide nuance rather than simply dismiss their efforts as naive. Vanessa pointed out that every previous negotiation with the U.S. has been accompanied by targeted assassinations or military strikes, from Qasem Soleimani to the bombing of Qatar during Hamas talks. We also both point to the possibility that China may have pressured Iran into accepting the Islamabad talks as a quid pro quo for Beijing’s diplomatic cover at the UN. I added that the U.S. is simultaneously mobilizing troops, expanding draft registration, and asking automakers like General Motors to retool for weapons production—moves not seen since World War II and those indicating war is certainly not over. From our understanding any ceasefire is likely a tactical pause rather than a genuine path to peace, with neither Washington nor Israel inclined to honor long-term commitments.
Vanessa reports from Lebanon, where Israeli bombing and occupation have intensified even as ceasefire announcements are made. She cited analyst reports that U.S. negotiators arrived in Islamabad without a mandate, suggesting the talks were merely a fact-finding mission controlled ultimately by Israeli interests. On the popular notion that Israel “controls” America, I add that the U.S. deep state and Zionist networks are fully fused, operating as a single fascistic apparatus and Washington certainly knows Israel’s every move as it funds it entirely. It’s clear that the goal remains the same: to “Gazify” southern Lebanon, Nakba-style, and eventually dismantle any independent financial or political systems in the region. Vanessa notes that Hezbollah’s usury-free banking system has been systematically bombed precisely because it offers a working alternative to global capitalist debt structures, much like Iran which is also outside of that network—another pillar of resistance. She also adds a key detail that because of the U.S.-Israeli actions on Lebanon and the meeting of the President and Prime Minister after Israel bombed and killed hundreds, people’s sentiments have shifted against the government and in favor of Hezbollah more than before.
Again in recent conversations with people in or from the region of West Asia, I add a reminder that geopolitics is not a game and things are more connected than they appear. Ordinary Peruvians face daily violence from extortion gangs while waiting hours to vote under suspicious conditions, as their country’s resources fill foreign profits, while Lebanese and Iranian civilians endure bombardment from an adversary with no intention of negotiating in good faith—problems that can be traced back both directly and indirectly to Western imperialism. Vanessa does add one vital point: Iran’s drone technology, now being reverse-engineered by Germany and Ukraine, proves that the resistance axis has achieved a level of indigenous military production that rivals major powers. Ultimately we urge our audience to reject simplistic narratives—whether romanticizing China and Russia or demonizing all negotiation as surrender. In the end humanity itself is the battlefield, and the outcome will shape not just West Asia or Latin America, but the global balance between empire and sovereignty.
Also feel free to donate to me here if you prefer:
https://buymeacoffee.com/fiorellaisabel
Venmo: Fiorella-Isabel
Thank You for supporting my work, it means a lot and helps me continue to do much more!
