"If you remain within the bounds of common sense, then the hunger strike differs from suicide in that it involves at least two rather than one outcome.

That is, a hunger strike may end in success and the hunger striker's demands will be met.

Such a result is possible only in part because of the courage and inflexibility of the hungry. To a large extent, it depends on the public's attention to his hunger strike and the availability of levers of influence on society against his opponents.

In the case of Sentsov, it is obvious that this second component is not sufficiently. She was not there when he started his hunger strike, and now.

World leaders are concerned about other problems, and Putin does not consider life and death of Sentsov sufficient reason for concessions.

And indeed: we know perfectly well how he reacts to this kind of demonstrative blackmail of a deliberately weaker enemy.

Exactly therefore, I considered and I consider Sentsov's hunger strike an error at the moment. Perhaps under other circumstances and in different circumstances, it could end successfully. But not now.

I admit that I can make mistakes, but everything that is happening now only proves that there is practically no chance for Sentsov's success.

In these conditions, his hunger strike is virtually indistinguishable from suicide.

And this is too big a gift for those who dream that we all disappear by ourselves. They died, hanged themselves, drank themselves, drowned themselves.

Sintsov! Do not fool around! Stop Hunger Strike. We need you alive! While you are alive - the chances of being at large are higher. And the chances of getting all Ukrainians out of Russian prisons.

And if you die, nothing will change.. But the world without you will be incomplete.

Stay with us and x. th with them ", - summed up Koch.