• Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    6 months ago

    Good decision. A clear back and forth has been established demonstrating that government concession will actually give results with the organisation. Even with the org designated as a terrorist org it is able to get results.

    • LeninWeave [none/use name, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      If you think about it, it could make sense to pause it if legitimate negotiation begins and resume it if it fails, rather than die mid-negotiation right before getting concessions. It’s not like a labor strike, where pausing would make it clear that you’re reaching your limit, since the limit of a hunger strike is the prisoner’s willingness to give up their life (and pausing while the government negotiates and resuming if the government walks away would make that clear).

      In this case, they got concessions, so clearly pausing the strike wasn’t a tactical mistake.

      • couldhavebeenyou@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah you’re right, but still. If they hadn’t, saying they’d paused still has a better sound to it than stopped.

  • footfaults@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    I am glad that they are ending their hunger strike. I was worried that the UK would prefer to see them to die than negotiate