China Mil Watch Mandarin-source monitoring · Chinese military & security reporting
Independent monitor
Official PRC military media, read in the original
← Daily Brief
Doctrine Political Work

Special Issue on Building the Military Through Politics · Forging Essentials | All for the Front, All for Victory

政治建军专刊·淬火要论丨一切为了前线 一切为了胜利
PLA Daily (解放军报) 24 August 2026
View original source ↗
Writing in a PLA political work journal under a special issue on 'building the military through politics,' author Yu Yuanlai traces the institutional lineage of the principle 'all for the front, all for victory' from the 1929 Gutian Conference and the 1934 First National Political Work Conference through the 2014 Gutian All-Army Political Work Conference, arguing that political work derives its legitimacy solely from its contribution to combat effectiveness. The article names three recurring pathologies—content that 'fires at empty targets' (打空靶), procedures that 'go around in circles' (兜圈子), and evaluation that 'spins in a void' (空转轮)—and illustrates each with a contemporary example, including a December 2025 red-versus-blue exercise in central China where a company political instructor's pre-scripted battlefield mobilization backfired because it was mistimed and disconnected from the actual operational tempo. This is standard political work doctrine content, but its value lies in documenting how the PLA frames the persistent tension between formalism and combat utility in political work, and in confirming that the 'combat-effectiveness standard' (战斗力标准) articulated at the 2014 Gutian conference remains the authoritative benchmark against which unit political officers are expected to be evaluated.

All for the Front, All for Victory

■ Yu Yuanlai

On February 7, 1934—the Southern Minor New Year's Eve—a chill still gripped the Gannan earth. Inside the Central Government Grand Hall at Shazhouba in Ruijin, Jiangxi, 258 Red Army political workers who had converged from various base areas through layer upon layer of blockades were attending the Red Army's First National Political Work Conference, a six-day gathering.

Outside the hall, the Nationalist army's million-strong fifth "encirclement and suppression" campaign was closing in step by step…. At the conference, Comrade Zhou Enlai, addressing the phenomenon of political work becoming detached from combat realities, emphasized that "political work is the lifeline of the Red Army" and that "all political work must subordinate itself to the overall operational plan; all political work must serve victory at the front."

On October 30, 2014, in the deep of autumn, the All-Army Political Work Conference was convened at Gutian. Chairman Xi clearly pointed out that political work must "break out of the vicious cycle of self-design, self-circulation, and self-assessment," and stressed the need to "firmly establish the combat-effectiveness standard throughout the entire military."

Spanning eighty years, the People's Army's questioning and pursuit of how political work can serve and guarantee the enhancement of combat effectiveness has never changed. It has always held fast to the spiritual thread of "all for the front, all for victory"—this is both the logical starting point and the value origin of our military's political work, and more importantly, the key to keeping the lifeline perpetually vital.

Today, as the bugle call urges us forward toward the on-schedule achievement of the centenary Army-building goals, and as we face a complex and grave security situation, we must deeply recognize: political work was born for war and exists for victory; it must always be anchored to the fundamental point of "all for the front, all for victory." Only by integrating this principle into the practice of strengthening the military can we ensure that political work always resonates in step with combat-effectiveness building.

I

Leafing through the annals of the People's Army, one finds a thought-provoking phenomenon: virtually every major innovation in our military's political work occurred in moments of crisis, when problems were concentrated and maladies rampant; the classic cases of our military's political work are mostly inscribed at those critical junctures of fierce combat and life-or-death stakes.

In 1927, the gunshots at Nanchang and the struggle along the Hunan-Jiangxi border together ignited the spark of revolution. Yet the painful lesson of the sharp reduction in the Nanchang Uprising forces and the grim reality that the Autumn Harvest Uprising's 5,000-strong force had dwindled to barely a thousand brought the revolutionary forces to the brink of collapse.

Pessimism spread like a tide, and this newly born revolutionary armed force was undergoing a severe test of survival. At the critical moment, Comrade Mao Zedong and Comrade Zhu De independently made the same strategic choice—political consolidation and training.

The "Three Disciplines and Eight Points of Attention" reorganization at Sanwan established the organizational principle of "building the Party branch at the company level"; the "Three Rectifications in Southern Jiangxi" established Party branches in the troops and achieved the Party's comprehensive leadership over the military. These two historic initiatives, like a prairie fire, reshaped the revolutionary armed forces and injected a powerful political gene into troops on the verge of disintegration.

By establishing company-level Party branches, instituting the political commissar system, and implementing democratic practices, political work achieved a qualitative transformation from "mobilization-by-campaign" to "embedded support" (嵌入式支撑). This system of political work reaching down to the squad and platoon level not only stabilized morale but also pioneered the foundational system of "the Party commands the gun," injecting the gene of "political work as lifeline" into the new-type People's Army.

The deep-rooted ailments of the old army clung like a disease to the bone; the erosion of erroneous thinking gnawed like a worm at the roots. In the winter of 1929, at Gutian in western Fujian, amid a series of major disputes and ideological disagreements over army-building, the Gutian Conference resolution swept away abuses and corrected the course with the force of thunder, profoundly answering the fundamental questions of "for whom does the Red Army fight, why does it fight, and how does it achieve victory." It established the fundamental principles of ideological Party-building and political military-building, providing the People's Army with an action guide and a great spiritual edifice for defeating the enemy.

Xiao Ke, who was then Chief of Staff of the First Column of the Fourth Red Army, recalled: "At that time, we all treated the resolution as Party class teaching material, regarded it as Red Army regulations, and used it as the standard for inspecting and measuring work. Before long, the troops advanced into the central Wuyi Mountains and southern Jiangxi; discipline improved, internal unity strengthened, and combat effectiveness rose."

On October 24, 1934, in a mountain hollow at Muhuang in Yinjiang, Guizhou, the triumphant meeting of the Sixth Red Army Corps and the Third Red Army (later restored to its designation as the Second Red Army Corps) stirred feelings of pride and joy. Yet behind this historically recorded meeting lurked a far deeper political crisis—

The Third Red Army, owing to the long-term weakening of political work, had formed the erroneous perception that "political work is dispensable," to the point that "within the troops there was still no understanding that political work is the lifeline of the Red Army; some even looked down on political work and political organs, thinking that 'political work is not fighting' and is something that can be taken or left."

Addressing this erroneous tendency, Ren Bishi pointed out the importance of the Red Army's political commissar system and political work, "opposing the erroneous tendency of political workers not studying military affairs and military commanders not studying politics," and requiring that political work must "strengthen company-level Party branches" and directly serve front-line combat.

Political work has never been an "add-on" to combat effectiveness; it is the "lifeline" that determines victory or defeat. When the political gene of "all for the front, all for victory" is fused into the bloodstream, and when the institutional advantage of "building the Party branch at the company level" is transformed into organizational power, political work becomes the solid ideological foundation of combat effectiveness.

This mighty power of transforming political advantage into the advantage of victory was vividly demonstrated in the grand epics that followed—during the Long March, the Second Red Army Corps spent two years and three months traversing multiple provinces and regions, breaking through the encirclement, pursuit, interception, and blocking of hundreds of thousands of enemy troops, and completing the strategic transfer through victory in more than 110 battles, proving that political work was fulfilling its role as a lifeline.

In September 1937, before the Battle of Pingxingguan, some officers and soldiers lacked confidence, influenced by the Nationalist army's successive defeats. The directors of the political training offices of each Eighth Route Army regiment immediately led political cadres at all levels to go down to the front line to inspire morale. During the battle, political cadres at all levels commanded from the front, carrying out mobilization wherever the fighting reached, ultimately winning the first great victory since the outbreak of the War of Resistance Against Japan and shattering the myth that "Japanese troops are invincible."

Establishing military-political committees to oversee the overall situation, restoring the political commissar system to solidify the organizational foundation, going to the fields to mobilize the military and the people to defend their homes and country, lecturing in the trenches on "winning battles and saving China," and leveraging the unique advantage of disintegrating the enemy to divide enemy ranks…. "All political work is for victory at the front"—wartime political work was endowed with an even weightier historical significance. In 1938, American officer Evans Carlson, visiting the Eighth Route Army's base in Shanxi, remarked with admiration: "Political work is the most important factor in the Eighth Route Army's military victories."

In 1948, during the Huai-Hai Campaign, battles were frequent. Officers and soldiers of our military crouched in trenches for extended periods, the volume of earthwork was enormous, and living conditions were harsh. Companies called out the slogans "turn the trenches into soldiers' homes" and "bring work into the trenches," carrying out activities such as challenge-and-response competitions, revolutionary emulation drives, cultural and recreational activities, small-scale discussion meetings, on-the-spot merit citations, and on-the-spot Party admissions in the trenches, conducting trench political work with great vitality and effectiveness, powerfully guaranteeing operational victory.

Political work is combat effectiveness. This is not theoretical deduction but a truth proven in blood and fire. Su Yu, recalling the Huai-Hai Campaign, said: "600,000 defeating 800,000—on the surface it was a military miracle; in essence it was a political miracle."

In 1952, on the Korean War battlefield, during the Battle of Triangle Hill (上甘岭), Li Mingtian, Deputy Chief of the Propaganda Section of the 45th Division of the 15th Army, created "rifle-stock poetry" (枪杆诗), another innovation in battlefield propaganda and agitation. "Where on the battlefield is political work most needed? At the front! Where the fighting is most fierce! How to do it? It must adapt to the battle." He repeatedly pondered, wrote the heroic stories he had gathered into short and moving poems, printed them on palm-sized slips of paper, and pasted them onto the rifle stocks of officers and soldiers, making them "spiritual rations" and a "bugle call for decisive victory" that inspired fighting spirit and boosted confidence, releasing powerful organizational and spiritual force under conditions of extreme survival.

Delving into the sea of history, the past speaks clearly. From Sanwan to Gutian, from the War of Resistance Against Japan to the War of Liberation, from Triangle Hill to today, history has repeatedly told us: our military's political work is rooted in the battlefield, its soul lies in winning battles, and its value lies at the front. Deviate from this direction, and political work loses its soul; aim at this target, and political work can forge an invincible force.

II

It is easy to establish an original aspiration; it is not easy to hold fast to it. It is easy to set a standard; it is not easy to implement it.

After a long period of peace, some officers and soldiers easily forget the cruelty of war, lose their sense of hardship and danger, and slacken their fighting will. In such an environment, political work itself easily develops problems: the work done does not match the demands of war, becomes disconnected from what the front needs, and runs counter to the fundamental mission of "winning battles."

The first pathology is content that "fires at empty targets" (打空靶)—saying things that officers and soldiers do not want to hear and that the troops do not need. What does "missing the target" mean? It means the content of political work does not match the needs of actual combat: it cannot identify problems, cannot strike the right note, cannot reach the hearts of soldiers, and cannot penetrate to the root of serving combat effectiveness.

As early as 1944, Tan Zheng, in his "Report on the Question of Army Political Work," criticized this tendency of educational content becoming detached from reality, pointing out that some comrades preferred to talk to soldiers about major international and domestic trends but were unwilling to talk about the trends in their own locality, their own army, their own company, or their own unit…. What they called for was not what those troops actually needed….

If political work becomes detached from operational requirements and fails to deeply resolve officers' and soldiers' ideological and cognitive problems regarding combat missions, it will to a certain extent damage combat effectiveness. In December 2025, a red-versus-blue confrontation exercise was launched in the heartland of central China. A newly appointed company political instructor (指导员), in order not to affect his evaluation score, conducted a "passionate and stirring" battlefield mobilization according to a pre-drafted political work plan. However, because it was not tightly synchronized with the timing of the battle and contained too many empty words and big talk, it not only failed to inspire morale but instead generated resistance among officers and soldiers.

The second pathology is procedures that "go around in circles" (兜圈子)—devolving into formalism (形式主义) and bureaucratism (文牍主义). Procedural cumbersomeness means that political work places excessive emphasis on procedures and details, becomes detached from battlefield realities, the needs of officers and soldiers, and the requirements of the troops, substitutes complete documentation for actual implementation, and substitutes procedural completeness for results-orientation.

After the Gutian Conference, the Fourth Red Army achieved some victories in external-line operations. As the situation improved, a tendency to pursue fanfare and spectacle in political work began to raise its head. Some units, disregarding the "joint suppression" by the Nationalist army's Jin Handing forces, engaged in a series of formalistic actions—posting slogans, shouting catchphrases, holding mass rallies, and making pledges—which delayed necessary combat preparations, allowing the enemy's "punitive expedition" to succeed easily and press directly on Gutian. Although the Red Army ultimately broke out of the enemy's encirclement, "formalism kills people" left a deep impression on Mao Zedong.

In December 1932, Mao Zedong pointed out that the Red Army must "pay attention to practical combat education and exercises in all training, and thoroughly abolish all forms of non-combat education and training from the past." On the eve of the War of Liberation, he required the People's Army to "further accomplish the task of improving army political work and overcome the dogmatism and formalism that exist in the army."

Formalism is the great enemy of combat effectiveness and the great enemy of political work. Chairman Xi has repeatedly emphasized the need to "resolutely oppose bureaucratism and the philosophy of red tape." Political work is not "embroidery"; it is for fighting. Political work must adhere to a work orientation conducive to enhancing combat effectiveness, proceed from reality, act in accordance with objective laws, be reverent in spirit and simple in action, discard complexity in favor of simplicity, and use a solid work style to drive implementation and produce results.

The third pathology is evaluation that "spins in a void" (空转轮)—measuring success by spectacle rather than combat effectiveness. Vacuous spinning means that the assessment of political work effectiveness lacks the hard standard of combat effectiveness, falls into the vicious cycle of self-evaluation, produces no actual benefit, looks lively on the surface while actual results are ignored; the machine keeps turning but outputs no substantive power.

In the past, the standard for political work was "hard": whether it was done well or not depended on the combat effectiveness of the unit. On January 18, 1941, Luo Ruiqing pointed out in "We Must Greatly Enhance the Tenacity of Our Army's Political Work": the tenacity of our army's political work should be especially manifested in the great power of our army's wartime political work, so as to guarantee the completion of every combat mission and the achievement of victory in every battle.

In a peaceful environment, this standard easily becomes softened, weakened, hollowed out, and marginalized. Some units gradually develop the phenomenon of political work and combat readiness being "two separate skins" (两张皮), equating political work with holding meetings and issuing documents, filling out forms and leaving paper trails, and conducting inspections and evaluations; they are keen on creating spectacle and putting on a show, appearing lively and with ledgers full, while in reality having little connection to training and combat readiness preparation and contributing nothing to enhancing combat effectiveness.

As Luo Ronghuan pointed out at the Shandong Military-Industry Conference in 1944: "Some political workers have liberalism and a preoccupation with personal status; they do not care about military work or the improvement of military technology, but are satisfied only with their numerous meetings and numerous work plans, quarreling over time and over precedence, detached from the realities of war."

The hollowing out of evaluation is the key crux constraining political work from firmly establishing the combat-effectiveness standard. In April 2015, the "Opinions on Implementing and Carrying Out the Combat-Effectiveness Standard in Party Committee Leadership Work" was issued, explicitly requiring that work be planned, guided, and carried out with a tight focus on enhancing combat effectiveness. Making the degree to which political work supports and contributes to combat effectiveness the measuring standard, and driving the transformation of evaluation indicators from "soft tasks" to "hard benchmarks," of evaluation subjects from "self-circulation" to "actual-combat traction," and of evaluation results from "leadership satisfaction" to "battlefield validation"—only in this way can we ensure that political work permeates every aspect of combat-effectiveness building and is integrated into the entire process of military struggle preparation.

Probing the root causes behind these pathologies, it ultimately comes down to a shift in the position of the original aspiration, the hollowing out of value standards, and the drifting of the center of gravity from the primary mission—forgetting the fundamental attribute that our military is forever a combat force, forgetting the fundamental mission of political work of "all for the front, all for victory," and forgetting combat effectiveness as the one and only fundamental standard.

III

The combat-effectiveness standard is the sole standard for measuring all work of the military. An important task of political work in the new era is to ensure that this standard takes root and bears fruit in every aspect of force building. Political work must truly be integrated into the chain of combat readiness and war preparation, embedded into every link of the future battlefield, and ultimately empower the winning of battles, demonstrating its powerful role as a lifeline on the road to strengthening the military.

The roots must be planted in the character of "war" (战). "All for the front, all for victory"—this is the mission inherent to political work from its very inception. As Comrade Wang Jiaxiang said in those years, political work is the original driving force for enhancing the Red Army's combat effectiveness.

Today, we face a peaceful environment without the smoke of gunpowder, and the "peace disease" (和平病) is the greatest enemy. How should political work be conducted? The most pressing task is to keep a close eye on changes on the battlefield and the needs of fighting. We cannot merely reason in classrooms or seek answers in books; we must break through these limitations, integrate education into the command chain and permeate it into the training ground, and vigorously cultivate the fighting spirit of "fearing neither hardship nor death" (一不怕苦、二不怕死).

As early as 1930, our military's first set of political work regulations stipulated that the purpose of political work was to "consolidate the Red Army's combat effectiveness." The newly revised "Regulations on Military Political Work" even more explicitly and unequivocally requires that political work must focus on combat readiness and war preparation as its primary responsibility and main business. This tradition is unbroken: political work divorced from enhancing combat effectiveness becomes water without a source and a tree without roots, easily spinning in a void and going off course.

What is the core of recalibrating the political work evaluation system? It is to thoroughly change the past practice of "looking more at materials and less at actual results," and to make the actual contribution of political work to the enhancement of combat effectiveness an important assessment indicator.

Political consolidation and training (政治整训) means cutting away the showy scaffolding unrelated to fighting, breaking the old bad habits that weaken combat effectiveness, and focusing on whether the officers and soldiers have sufficient spirit and vigor, whether the unit's combat effectiveness is strong, and whether the foundation for combat readiness and war preparation is solid. The orientation of everything for the sake of fighting must be set straight and established firmly.

Whether political work is grasped tightly and substantively cannot be separated from strict supervision and inspection. History has lessons: in 1932, the Party Central Committee severely criticized the phenomena of political work in the Soviet area Red Army being "weak," "perfunctory," and even "wavering" and "resistant." In 1934, Comrade Wang Jiaxiang set the tone directly at the political work conference: political work must guarantee victory in every battle! Problems must be resolved before battle; after battle, those who disobey orders must be resolutely corrected. This established an iron rule for wartime political work: strict supervision, directing force toward war. This tradition continues to this day.

Our military's history of multiple political consolidation and training campaigns and political work conferences was precisely to discover problems in a timely manner, correct deviations, and ensure that political work always serves and guarantees combat readiness and war preparation. Entering the new era, we must use "strictness" as the main keynote, vigorously rectify the problems of political work becoming detached from actual combat, engaging in formalism, and having its role weakened. We must strictly enforce political discipline, press down supervisory responsibilities, compel changes in work style and improvements in capability, and make political work truly a "force multiplier" (倍增器) for combat effectiveness.

Whether political work has vitality depends critically on whether it can be implemented in practice and produce real results. One of the core standards is: whether it can facilitate the accomplishment of combat missions.

The 1955 assault on Yijiangshan Island was our military's first combined arms operation involving the Army, Navy, and Air Force. With many branches of service and difficult coordination, officers and soldiers were uncertain and even somewhat afraid. What was to be done? The Party committee of the front-line command made its decision: for the three services to coordinate in action, first their thinking must be united! They organized Army personnel to board naval vessels and Air Force personnel to enter Army barracks, mutually studying branch-of-service knowledge and researching tactical coordination, eliminating the sense of mystery and fear, and ensuring the ability to "link up and win." Political work demonstrated its great power at the very front line.

Today, the political work of various units likewise emphasizes going deep to the front line and implementing a closed-loop approach. A certain unit of the Navy insists that wherever a mission advances, political work follows. In arduous and dangerous environments, cadres and backbone personnel move to the front to do ideological work, strengthen organizational building, and conduct mass work, consolidating military morale, tempering the force, and successfully completing missions.

A certain unit of the Rocket Force, implementing Chairman Xi's requirement to "conduct ideological and political work at the foot of the launch pad," has established a complete work chain: deploy the mission, verify at the front line, conduct after-action review to find problems after completion, rectify and improve, then set out again. In this way, ideological guidance, organizational function, talent cultivation, and work-style building are all threaded through the entire process of combat readiness and war preparation, allowing political work to truly take root at the combat post and direct its force toward winning.

Historical experience warns us: political work detached from actual combat is wasted effort, and a combat-effectiveness standard that cannot reach the last mile is an empty slogan.

To truly establish the combat-effectiveness standard firmly throughout the entire military, political work must form a closed loop at the last mile and front line: draw up checklists and clarify responsibilities in accordance with combat missions; the advancement of work must be able to withstand actual-combat-style inspection and supervision; after missions are completed, conduct after-action assessments, promptly rectify problems discovered, and continuously optimize and improve. We must ensure that work deployments receive responses when passed down, that front-line situations receive responses when fed back up, and that lessons from actual combat can promote improvements in work. Only in this way can political work play a critical role at critical moments and critical positions.

IV

"All for the front, all for victory." The destination of this resolve lies with every person who leads troops and fights battles. Whether political work can truly serve combat effectiveness depends critically on political cadres. What they are like determines what the military's political work is like; when they understand fighting, political work truly works!

Looking back on the journey, from the spark at Gutian to the flames of the War of Resistance, and then to the years of peace, one iron law runs throughout: political cadres must understand military affairs and know how to fight! This is the code for the inexhaustible vitality of our military's political work.

First, look at the "exemplary" figures: Luo Ronghuan was acclaimed as the "Marshal of Political Work," yet his military talent was equally admirable. Mao Zedong once gave him high praise: "When Luo Ronghuan was conducting the War of Resistance in Shandong, he put forward tactics such as 'turning the flanks' (翻边战术) and 'the enemy advances, we advance' (敌进我进). Without these pioneering and highly effective tactics, the overall situation of the War of Resistance in Shandong could not have been opened up!"

Next, look at the historical inheritance: as early as the 1929 Gutian Conference, it was made clear that political personnel should study military knowledge; at the 2014 All-Army Political Work Conference at Gutian, it was again emphasized that political cadres must strive to study military affairs, study command, and study science and technology, comprehensively improving their overall quality and practical capabilities—they must become experts in political work and also experts in military work; only then can political work be done well.

Practice yields true knowledge. During the War of Resistance Against Japan, our military implemented "dual military-political training" (军政双训), producing a large number of outstanding commanders proficient in both military and political affairs. In March 1940, the "Order on Strengthening Wartime Political Work" issued by the Eighth Route Army Field Political Department explicitly required that "all political work personnel must study military affairs and study wartime political work."

In January 1954, Xiao Hua, Deputy Director of the General Political Department, proposed: "Political work must penetrate into technology and professional work, guaranteeing the improvement of military technology and all professional work…. Only in this way will political workers have the right to speak, be able to create work methods suited to various technologies and professional work, and will political work be able to achieve results."

Nie Rongzhen wrote in his memoirs: "Political work must make clear the overall objective of everything for victory at the front. Only by making this objective clear…will political cadres pay attention to studying tactics, learn to conduct political work under various combat conditions, and be able to overcome bureaucratism, armchair strategizing (闭门造车), formalism, and so on in political work."

The practice of building and developing the People's Army invariably illuminates one iron law: the authority and effectiveness of political work depend on whether political cadres can resonate in step with military practice.

Entering the new era, the form of warfare has undergone profound transformation, but the objective of "everything for victory" has never changed, and the truth that "the key lies in people" has become ever more profound. Facing the challenges of informatized and intelligentized warfare (信息化智能化战争), it is far from sufficient for political cadres merely to "understand ideology"; they must fuse "studying military affairs, practicing command, and researching science and technology" into their bloodstream and forge themselves into composite talents (复合型人才) proficient in both civil and military affairs.

Only in this way can political work truly break free from the shackles of "bureaucratism" and "armchair strategizing," achieving "synchronized heartbeat and aligned force" (心跳同频、发力同向) with combat readiness and war preparation. And only in this way can the "combat-effectiveness standard" transform from a slogan on the wall into a truth that officers and soldiers firmly believe in their hearts and a yardstick they consciously apply in their actions.

Inheriting the gene of "proficiency in both military and political affairs" (军政兼通), forging the hard-core capabilities to win future wars—this is the most precious heirloom that history has left to political cadres of the new era, and also the most urgent bugle call to charge!

V

A hundred years of wind and rain have not altered its resolve; the passage of time has not changed its essence. Political work—this "lifeline" of the People's Army—must carry forward its proper value through the baptism of war's flames. It cannot become "showy scaffolding" (花架子), cannot fall into the trap of "two separate skins" (两张皮), and cannot contract the "peace disease" (和平病). It must be a bugle call to charge, a fueling station, a fixed star of orientation, and must be the flame in the hearts of officers and soldiers that never goes out.

The journey is long, always oriented toward war; the original aspiration to win battles remains forever young. Looking back on the trail of battle smoke, "all for the front, all for victory" has long since settled as the spiritual bedrock of the People's Army, fused into the bloodstream and soul of political work.

Toward the centenary Army-building goals, carry forward the fine traditions of political work, firmly establish the combat-effectiveness standard throughout the entire military, build a world-class military, defend national sovereignty, security, and development interests, and forge an unbreakable political foundation and gather the boundless force that is invincible wherever it goes!

Original Chinese
一切为了前线 一切为了胜利 ■余远来 1934年2月7日,南方小年,赣南大地春寒料峭。江西瑞金沙洲坝中央政府大礼堂内,从各根据地穿越重重封锁汇聚于此的258名红军政治工作者,正参加为期6天的红军第一次全国政治工作会议。 会场外,国民党百万大军的第五次“围剿”正步步紧逼……会上,周恩来同志针对政治工作脱离作战实际现象,强调“政治工作是红军的生命线”“一切政治工作,要服从整个作战计划;一切政治工作,都要为着前线上的胜利”。 2014年10月30日,时值深秋,古田全军政治工作会议召开。习主席鲜明指出政治工作要“走出自我设计、自我循环、自我检验的怪圈”,强调“要把战斗力标准在全军牢固立起来”。 跨越80载春秋,人民军队对于政治工作如何服务保证战斗力提高的追问与追求始终没有变,始终坚守“一切为了前线、一切为了胜利”的精神主线——这既是我军政治工作的逻辑起点和价值原点,更是生命线永葆生命力的关键。 今天,如期实现建军一百年奋斗目标鼓角催征,面对复杂严峻的安全形势,我们必须深刻认识到:政治工作因打仗而生、为胜利而存,必须始终锚定“一切为了前线、一切为了胜利”这个基点。唯有将这一原则融入强军实践,方能确保政治工作始终与战斗力建设同频共振。 一 翻开人民军队的史册,有一个现象耐人寻味:我军政治工作的每一次重大创新,几乎都发生在问题集中、弊病丛生的危亡之境;我军政治工作的一个个经典案例,大都铭刻在那些战火猛烈、生死攸关的关键当口。 1927年,南昌城头的枪声与湘赣边界的抗争,共同点燃了革命的星火。然而,南昌起义部队官兵人数锐减的惨痛教训,秋收起义5000人部队仅余千人的严峻现实,使革命力量濒临瓦解边缘。 悲观情绪如潮水般蔓延,这支刚刚诞生的革命武装,正经历着生死存亡的严峻考验。危急关头,毛泽东同志与朱德同志不约而同作出战略抉择——政治整训。 “三湾改编”,确立“支部建在连上”的组织原则;“赣南三整”,在部队建立党支部,实现党对军队的全面领导。这两大历史创举,如同燎原之火重塑革命武装,为濒临溃散的部队注入了强大的政治基因。 通过建立连队党支部、设立党代表制度、实行民主制度,政治工作实现了从“运动式发动”到“嵌入式支撑”的质变。这种直达班排的政治工作体系,不仅稳定了军心士气,更开创了“党指挥枪”的根本制度,为新型人民军队注入了“政治工作生命线”的基因。 旧军队的沉疴积弊如附骨之疽,错误思想的侵蚀若蛀本之蠹。1929年冬,闽西古田。围绕建军的系列重大问题和思想认识上的分歧争论,古田会议决议以雷霆之势涤荡流弊、校准航向,深刻回答了“红军为谁而战、为何而战、如何制胜”的根本问题,确立了思想建党、政治建军根本原则,为人民军队克敌制胜提供了行动指南和精神巨构。 时任红四军第一纵队参谋长的萧克回忆说:“那时,我们都把决议当作党课教材,视为红军法规,也作为检查和衡量工作的标准。不久,部队向武夷山中部及赣南进军,纪律更好了,内部更团结了,战斗力提高了。” 1934年10月24日,贵州印江木黄的山坳间,红六军团与红三军(后恢复编制为红二军团)的胜利会师激荡着豪情与喜悦。然而,这场载入史册的会师背后,却潜藏着更为深刻的政治危机—— 红三军因长期政治工作弱化,已形成“政治工作可有可无”的错误认知,以致“在部队中还不解政治工作是红军的生命线,甚至轻视政治工作和政治机关,以为‘政治工作不是打仗’,是可要可不要的东西”。 针对这一错误倾向,任弼时指出红军的政治委员制度和政治工作的重要性,“反对政治工作人员不学习军事和军事指挥员不学习政治的错误倾向”,要求政治工作必须“健全连队支部”,直接服务于一线作战。 政治工作从来不是战斗力的“附加品”,而是决定胜负的“生命线”。当“一切为了前线、一切为了胜利”的政治基因融入血脉,当“支部建在连上”的制度优势转化为组织力,政治工作便成为战斗力坚实的思想根基。 这种将政治优势转化为制胜优势的伟力,在后来的壮阔史诗中得到生动诠释——长征中,红二军团历时2年3个月跨越多个省区,突破数十万敌军围追堵截,以110余次战斗的胜利完成战略转移,正是政治工作发挥生命线作用的证明。 1937年9月,平型关战役前,有的官兵受国民党军队接连战败的影响,信心不足。八路军各团政训处主任立即率领各级政治干部下沉一线,激励士气。战斗中,各级政治干部全部靠前指挥,打到哪里就把动员做到哪里,最终取得全国抗战以来第一个大胜仗,打破了“日军不可战胜”的神话。 设立军政委员会统揽全局,恢复政治委员制度筑牢组织根基,到田间地头动员军民保家卫国,在战壕里宣讲“打胜仗、救中国”,发挥瓦解敌军的独特优势分化敌人阵营……“一切政治工作,都是为了前线的胜利”,抗战政治工作被赋予了更重的时代分量。1938年,美国军官卡尔逊在访问山西八路军驻地时,不无感叹地说:“政治工作是八路军军事行动获胜的最重要因素。” 1948年,淮海战役中,战斗频繁。我军官兵长时间蹲守堑壕,土工作业量极大,生活艰苦。各连队喊出“把战壕变成战士的家”“把工作做到战壕里去”的口号,在战壕中开展挑应战、革命竞赛、文化生活、小型座谈会、火线记功、火线入党等活动,把战壕政治工作开展得有声有色,有力保证了作战胜利。 政治工作就是战斗力。这不是理论推演,而是血与火证明的真理。粟裕在回忆淮海战役时说:“60万胜80万,表面是军事奇迹,实质是政治奇迹。” 1952年,抗美援朝战场,上甘岭战役中,15军45师宣传科副科长李明天的“枪杆诗”,成为战场宣传鼓动的又一创造。“战场上哪里最需要政治工作?是前线!是战斗最激烈的地方!怎么做?那得因战制宜。”他反复琢磨,把采写的英雄故事写成简短动情的诗歌,印刷成巴掌大的纸片,贴到指战员的枪托上,成为鼓舞斗志、激励信心的“精神干粮”和“决胜号角”,在极限生存条件下释放出了强大的组织力与精神力。 史海钩沉,往事昭昭。从三湾到古田,从抗日战争到解放战争,从上甘岭到今天,历史反复告诉我们:我军的政治工作,根在战场,魂在胜战,价值在前线。偏离了这个方向,政治工作就会失去灵魂;对准了这个靶心,政治工作就能凝聚不可战胜的力量。 二 初心好立,坚守不易;标准好定,落实不易。 和平日子过久了,部分官兵就容易忘了战争的残酷,少了忧患意识,松了战斗意志。这种环境下,政治工作本身也容易出现问题:干的活儿跟打仗需求对不上号,跟前线需要脱了节,跟“打胜仗”这个根本使命拧着劲儿。 病灶之一是内容“打空靶”——说的不是官兵想听的、部队需要的。什么是“脱靶”?就是政治工作的内容与实战需要不匹配,找不到问题,敲不准鼓点,做不到战士的心坎上,渗不进服务战斗力的根子上。 早在1944年,谭政就在《关于军队政治工作问题的报告》中批评了教育内容脱离实际这一倾向,指出有些同志在战士面前专门喜欢谈论国际大势与国内大势,却不愿意谈论本地本军与本连本队的大势……他们所号召的东西,并不是那个部队实际上所需要的东西…… 政治工作如果脱离作战需求,不深入解决官兵对作战任务的思想认知问题,就会在一定程度上损害战斗力。2025年12月,一场红蓝对抗演练在中原腹地打响,某连一位新任指导员为了不影响考评得分,根据事先拟定的政治工作预案,进行了“慷慨激昂”的战场动员,却因为与战斗时机扣得不紧、空话大话较多,不仅没有激发士气,反而让官兵产生抵触心理。 病灶之二是程序“兜圈子”—— 搞成了形式主义、文牍主义。程序上的繁琐,就是政治工作过度强调程序和细节,脱离战场实际、官兵需求与部队需要,用材料齐全代替工作落实,用程序完整代替效果导向。 古田会议之后,红四军在外线作战中取得部分胜利。形势向好,政治工作追求热闹和声势的倾向有所抬头。一些部队置国民党金汉鼎部“会剿”于不顾,大搞贴标语、喊口号、开大会、表决心等一系列形式主义动作,耽误了应有的战斗准备,致使敌人“进剿”轻易得手,直逼古田。红军虽然最终跳出了敌人的包围圈,“形式主义害死人”却给毛泽东留下了深刻的记忆。 1932年12月,毛泽东指出,红军“一切训练要注意实际的战斗教育和演习,彻底废除过去一切形式的非战斗的教育和训练。”解放战争前夕,他要求人民军队“必须进一步实现改进军队政治工作的任务,克服军队中存在着的教条主义和形式主义作风”。 形式主义是战斗力的大敌,也是政治工作的大敌。习主席反复强调,“坚决反对文牍主义和繁琐哲学”。政治工作不是“绣花”,而是为了打仗。政治工作必须坚持有利于提高战斗力的工作导向,从实际出发,按规律办事,居敬行简、去繁从简,以实的作风推动落地见效。 病灶之三是评价“空转轮”—— 干得好不好,不看战斗力看热闹。虚化空转,就是评价政治工作成效缺乏战斗力这个硬标准,陷入自我评价的怪圈,产生不了实际效益,表面上看起来很热闹,实际效果却被忽视了,机器一直在转,却没有输出实质性的动力。 过去,政治工作的标准很“硬”:做得好不好,就看这支部队的战斗力怎么样。1941年1月18日,罗瑞卿在《应当大大提高我军政治工作的顽强性》指出:我军政治工作的顽强性,尤其应表现在我军战时政治工作之强大的威力,以保证每一个战斗任务的完成和每一个战斗的胜利的争取。 身处和平环境,这个标准就容易被软化、弱化、虚化和边缘化。一些单位慢慢出现政治工作与备战打仗“两张皮”的现象,把政治工作等同于开会发文、填表留痕、检查评比,热衷于造声势、做表面文章,看似热热闹闹、台账满满,实则与练兵备战关联不大、对提升战斗力毫无裨益。 正如罗荣桓1944年在山东军工会上指出的那样:“部分政治工作者有自由主义、个人地位观念,不关心军事工作,不关心军事技术的提高,而只满足于自己繁多的会议,繁多的工作计划,争吵时间,争吵先后,脱离了战争的实际。” 评价上的虚化,是制约政治工作牢固立起战斗力标准的关键症结。2015年4月,《关于在党委领导工作中贯彻落实战斗力标准的意见》印发,明确要求紧紧围绕提高战斗力筹划、指导和展开工作。把政治工作对战斗力的支撑度与贡献率作为衡量标准,推动评价指标从“软任务”向“硬杠杠”转变、评价主体从“自我循环”向“实战牵引”转变、评价结果从“领导满意”向“战场认可”转变,才能确保政治工作贯穿到战斗力建设各方面,融入军事斗争准备全过程。 深究这些病灶背后的根源,说到底是初心站位偏移、价值标准虚化、重心主业跑偏,忘记了我军永远是战斗队的根本属性,忘记了政治工作“一切为了前线、一切为了胜利”的根本使命,忘记了战斗力这个唯一的根本的标准。 三 战斗力标准,是衡量军队一切工作的唯一标准。新时代的政治工作,一个重要任务就是确保这个标准在部队建设的方方面面都扎下根、结出果。要让政治工作真正融进备战打仗的链条,嵌入到未来战场的每一个环节,最终为打赢赋能,在强军路上彰显强大的生命线作用。 根子要扎在“战”字上。“一切为了前线、一切为了胜利”,这是政治工作与生俱来的使命。就像当年王稼祥同志说的,政治工作是提高红军战斗力的原动力。 今天,我们面对的是没有硝烟的和平环境,“和平病”是最大的敌人。政治工作怎么做?当务之急是紧盯战场变化和打仗需要。不能光在课堂上讲道理、在书本里找答案,要打破这些局限,把教育融入到指挥链里、渗透到训练场中,大力培育“一不怕苦、二不怕死”的战斗精神。 早在1930年,我军第一部政治工作条例就规定:政治工作的目的就是“巩固红军的战斗力”。新修订的《军队政治工作条例》,更是旗帜鲜明地要求政治工作必须聚焦备战打仗这个主责主业。这个传统一脉相承:政治工作离开了提升战斗力,就成了无源之水、无本之木,容易空转、跑偏。 校准政治工作的评价体系,核心是什么?就是彻底改变过去那种“看材料多、看实效少”的做法,把政治工作对战斗力提升的实际贡献,作为重要的考核指标。 政治整训,就是要砍掉那些跟打仗无关的花架子,破除那些削弱战斗力的老毛病,重点看官兵精气神足不足、部队战斗力强不强、备战打仗的根基牢不牢。一切为了打仗的导向,必须树得正、立得牢。 政治工作抓得紧不紧、实不实,离不开严格的监督检查。历史上就有教训:1932年党中央就严肃批评过苏区红军中政治工作“薄弱”“敷衍”甚至“动摇”“抵抗”的现象。1934年,王稼祥同志在政工会议上直接定调:政治工作必须保障每一个战斗的胜利!战前要解决问题,战后有不听命令的要坚决纠正。这为战时政治工作立下了铁规矩:从严督导,向战发力。这一传统延续至今。 我军历史上多次进行政治整训、召开政工会,就是为了及时发现问题、纠正偏差,确保政治工作始终服务保证备战打仗。进入新时代,必须用“严”的主基调,大力整顿政治工作脱离实战、搞形式主义、作用弱化的问题。严明政治纪律,压实督导责任,倒逼作风转变、能力提升,让政治工作真正成为战斗力的“倍增器”。 政治工作有没有生命力,关键看它能不能落到实处、见到实效。核心标准之一就是看:能不能促成战斗任务的完成。 1955年打一江山岛,是我军第一次陆海空联合作战,兵种多、协同难,官兵心里没底,甚至有点害怕。怎么办?前线指挥部党委定下决心:三军协同,先要思想同心!他们组织陆军上军舰、空军进陆军营房,互相学习兵种知识、研究战术配合,消除了神秘感和恐惧感,确保了“联得上、打得赢”。政治工作在最前线展现了强大力量。 今天,各部队的政治工作同样强调深入一线、闭环落实。海军某部坚持任务推进到哪里,政治工作就跟进到哪里。在艰苦危险的环境中,干部骨干靠前做思想工作、抓组织建设、搞群众工作,凝聚军心、锤炼部队,圆满完成任务。 火箭军某部落实习主席“把思想政治工作做到发射架下”的要求,建立起一套完整的工作链条:部署任务、一线检验、打完复盘找问题、整改提高再出发。这样就把思想引领、组织作用、人才培养、作风建设等工作,贯穿到备战打仗的全过程,让政治工作真正在战位扎根、为打赢发力。 历史经验警醒我们:政治工作脱离实战就是白忙活,战斗力标准落不到末端就是空口号。 要真正在全军树牢战斗力标准,政治工作就必须在末端一线形成闭环:对照打仗任务定清单、明责任;工作推进要经得起实战化检验和督导;任务完成后要复盘评估,发现问题及时整改,不断优化提升。要确保工作部署下去有回音,一线情况反馈上来有回应,实战经验教训能促进工作改进。只有这样,政治工作才能在关键时刻、关键位置发挥关键作用。 四 “一切为了前线、一切为了胜利。”这决心的终点,在每一个带兵打仗的人身上。政治工作能不能真正服务战斗力?关键看政治干部。他们什么样,军队的政治工作就什么样;他们懂打仗,政治工作才真管用! 回望征程,从古田的星火到抗战的烽烟,再到和平的岁月,一条铁律贯穿始终:政治干部必须懂军事、会打仗!这是我军政治工作生生不息的密码。 先看“标杆”人物:罗荣桓被誉为“政工元帅”,他的军事才能同样令人钦佩。毛泽东曾给予高度评价:“罗荣桓在山东抗战的时候,提出了‘翻边战术’‘敌进我进’等,没有这些开创性、卓有成效的战术,山东的抗战大局是打不开的!” 再看历史传承:早在1929年古田会议就明确,政治人员应当学习军事知识;2014年古田全军政工会再次强调,政治干部要努力学军事、学指挥、学科技,全面提高综合素质和实际能力,政治工作要成为行家里手,军事工作也要成为行家里手,这样才能把政治工作做好。 实践出真知。抗战时期,我军实行“军政双训”,造就了一大批军政兼通的优秀指挥员。1940年3月,八路军野战政治部关于《加强战时政治工作的训令》中,明确要求“一切政工人员要学习军事,并学习战时政治工作”。 1954年1月,总政治部副主任肖华提出:“政治工作必须渗透到技术、业务中去,保证军事技术和各项业务的提高……只有这样,政治工作者才有发言权,才能创造和各项技术、业务相适应的工作方式,政治工作才能收到成效。” 聂荣臻在回忆录中说:“政治工作必须明确一切为了前线的胜利这一总目标,只有明确这个目标……政治干部才会注意学战术,学会做各种战斗情况下的政治工作,才能克服政治工作中的文牍主义、闭门造车、形式主义等等。” 人民军队的建设发展实践,无不昭示一个铁律:政治工作的威信与实效,系于政治干部能否与军事实践同频共振。 走进新时代,战争形态深刻演变,但“一切为了胜利”的目标从未改变,“关键在人”的道理愈发深刻。面对信息化智能化战争的挑战,政治干部仅仅“懂思想”远远不够,必须将“学军事、练指挥、研科技”融入血脉,把自己锻造成文武双全的复合型人才。 唯有如此,政治工作才能真正挣脱“文牍主义”“闭门造车”的枷锁,与备战打仗实现“心跳同频、发力同向”。也唯有如此,“战斗力标准”才能从墙上的口号,变成官兵心中笃信的真理、行动中自觉的准绳。 传承“军政兼通”的基因,锻造打赢未来战争的硬核本领——这,是历史留给新时代政治干部最珍贵的传家宝,也是最紧迫的冲锋号! 五 百年风雨不改其志,时代变迁不易其本。政治工作,这条人民军队的“生命线”,必须在战火的洗礼中弘扬应有的价值。它不能成为“花架子”,不能陷入“两张皮”,不能患上“和平病”。它必须是冲锋号、加油站、定盘星,必须是官兵心中那团永不熄灭的火。 征途漫漫,始终向战;胜战初心,永远青春。回望一径烽烟,“一切为了前线、一切为了胜利”早已沉淀为人民军队的精神底色,融入政治工作的血脉灵魂。 向着建军一百年奋斗目标,赓续政治工作优良传统,把战斗力标准在全军牢固立起来,为建设世界一流军队,捍卫国家主权、安全、发展利益,筑牢坚不可摧的政治根基、凝聚无往不胜的磅礴力量!