As pragmatic realist moves go, it is a great deal less cynically capitulatory than it could be. The part of the compromise that, by their previous words and ac

As pragmatic realist moves go, it is a great deal less cynically capitulatory than it could be. The part of the compromise that, by their previous words and actions, they could be reasonably thought to be more against is purposefully limited in scope and time. The way I read it is that they are playing a move in the game which they hope gets a win in one area, with that move only costing their allowing another player to stall in another area. As compromises go, your limited win for their limit stall sounds pretty good to me. It is a lot better than the pragmatic capitulation of your limited win for their limited win. Descriptions of this as "they are selling out" are miss-characterizing this proposal and missing that difference.