The Prisoners Statement Regarding the End of the Hunger Strike
Mid-February 1985
We are speaking to those who have struggled with us during the hungers
strike, those who have made our demands their own. We want to explain
to you how we
arrived at our decision to now break off the hunger strike. It appears
to
us, and this was the reason for our decision, that there is a new point
from
which we can develop the struggle together.
We broke our hunger strike on February 1st, because our shared
development regarding the prisoners’ level of struggle around their
living conditions had reached an endpoint; the strike had ushered in a
qualitative leap in the
revolutionary struggle in the NATO states in the West European context.
The
politics of the metropolitan guerrilla have achieved the breakthrough
anticipated
by the last five years of struggle. From our point of view, conditions
have
developed that did not exist when we began the hungers strike. The
breakthrough in the West European dimension of revolutionary practice
forced the imperialist chain of States to establish a united
"strategic" reaction. The reality of this united arrangement was
immediately apparent following Action Elisabeth von Dyck[1], with the intervention of the
US Ministry of Foreign Affairs via the NATO governments. The objective
behind
this is, according to the line presented by Schultz [2], prevention and retaliation.
For us a process had begun, on the basis of the changing situation,
which led us to a new assessment and a new decision regarding our
hunger strike. It was clear, on the basis of this line of united
imperialist reaction, that they would make the prisoners the first
target of their attack, because they have us and, from their
perspective, the prisoners embody the politics. After the action of the
Commando Patsy O'Hara [3] we decided
to break off the strike to prevent them from using an old strategy
(dead prisoners versus the political leap forward) to achieve their
objective once again. That was, at the time, with 3 prisoners on the
edge, only a question of hours.
At this point, the strategic breakthrough becomes the sharpest means
for the prisoners. Whether it is necessary to die to be victorious is
no longer a question in keeping with the scale of things. The demand
for association was suddenly replaced by a new reality; the West
European guerrilla versus the unified imperialist rationale. That is to
say, not fulfilling the demand for association has become, for the
imperialist states, as important as the stationing of missiles is on
another level. They must, in opposition to the will of the majority of
the people, and regardless of whether or not there is a mass rebellion,
establish a threshold below which no NATO State can remain.
The imperialist system is forced to raise questions, which,
particularly in
the FRG [4], given that a shift in
the entire
international relationship could occur here, go to the core of power,
to
the unified State rationale.
An example of their substantial weakness, based on the dialectic of
struggle, is that they were obliged to expose themselves, to expose the
power structure with which we must deal. The speech Schultz made about
the three centers of
the revolutionary struggle in the coming years - West Europe, the
Middle East
and Latin America – Mitterand [5]
speaking
of "an international strategic struggle;" Soares [6], Spandolini [7],
etc, the statement of the NATO ambassador; they all show that it is, in
terms of
action, a united system.
Our strike was to be made an object lesson, an example of their
readiness to exercise power. At that point, we, the prisoners, couldn't
win. The West European guerrilla, for whom the strike was part of the
confrontation, and who tried to respond to it, can only lose
politically if none of our material goals can be reached with these
means, if more of us die and the meaning of
life in this objective situation becomes even harder to comprehend. For
us,
to stop now emphasizes the political victory; a victory for the unity
of
the guerrilla, the resistance and the prisoners. That the strike broke
through
the political wall around the prisoners so quickly, that there was
strong
solidarity here and internationally, that the facts of our real
situation became known rebounded against the opposition’s line; for a
period of time everything was perfectly clear, because they could only
respond to the political situation with naked power. This is their
problem with the Kontaktsperre [8];
they want it, but they don't want to
risk a still broader mobilization and a discussion that they will not
be
able to suppress. The efforts of the SPD [9]
bloodhounds run aground on exactly this issue; it creates a
consciousness
about the State's war against the prisoners that no longer leaves them
with
a free hand. After this victory, the NATO decision was that the
political
cost, internally and externally, was no longer an issue. On January
27th,
Kinkel said to the lawyers, "The federal government will accept the
consequences."
Regarding the second wall, the material wall, we have not, with this
strike, in the concrete political situation, gotten through it. We have
not, with our demand for association, changed anything. We will
struggle around this later and, as of now, on different bases; on the
basis of unified resistance, a practical and political experience we
have won together; on the basis of an internationalism that is such
that we, the prisoners, can struggle at this
level, that is to say, a concept of an international class war of which
we
are part; and on the basis of winning material breakthroughs in the
prison statutes whenever the balance of power makes this possible.
For the prisoners of the RAF and the resistance
Mid-February 1985
Footnotes
N.B. All footnotes in this document were
added by the translator and editor. None are originally from the RAF.
[1] Action Elisabeth von Dyck - in January 85,
Action Directe, a French anti-imperialist guerrilla group, which
released a common strategy paper with the RAF in January 85, killed
NATO General Audran. The killing was claimed by the Commando Elisabeth
von Dyck. Elisabeth von Dyck was a RAF member who was shot to death by
the police in May 1979. [return to text]
[2] George Schultz - US Secretary of State. [return to text]
[3] Commando Patsy O'Hara - the name of a RAF
Commando that shot Ernst Zimmermann, a key military-industrial complex
industrialist on February 1, 1985. Patsy O'Hara was an Irish National
Liberation Army prisoner of war who died on hunger strike for political
status in May 1981, the same hunger strike that claimed ten other
lives, including that of Bobby Sands. [return to text]
[4] FRG — Federal Republic of Germany, West
Germany. [return to text]
[5] François Mitterand - at that time President
of France. [return to text]
[6] Soares — at that time President of Portugal. [return to text]
[7] Spandolini – at that time Minister of Defense
of Italy. [return to text]
[8] Kontaktsperre - a German law that allows the
authorities to deny political prisoners all contact with the outside
world,
including lawyers’ visits, letters and all forms of media. [return
to text]
[9] SPD - the Social Democratic Party of Germany.
[return to text]
