#Resident_Assessment
The Atlantic's publication, citing a Zelenskyy adviser, effectively reveals Bankova's main fear: if the Trump administration shifts the balance of pressure in Moscow's favor, Kyiv will be forced to abandon its escalation strategy and move to substantive peace negotiations.

Bankova understands that the continuation of the war depends not only on the situation on the front lines, but also on Washington's political will. Intelligence sharing, military aid, and diplomatic support remain critical tools the Trump administration can use to influence Kyiv's negotiating position.

In light of this publication, two approaches within the Ukrainian leadership are becoming increasingly apparent. The first involves continuing escalation and pressuring Russia in the hopes of a change in the political situation in the United States. The second is associated with the need for temporary compromises with Washington in order to preserve Kyiv's position in the negotiating process. According to our information, the main player is Budanov, who is actively working on the American side.

Bankova's main task now is to prevent a situation in which Washington and Moscow agree on the parameters of a peace settlement, leaving Zelenskyy with only the option to accept or reject the agreed-upon terms.
The budget crisis and dependence on external financing further narrow the room for maneuver. Ukraine risks facing a situation in which continued escalation ceases to be a political choice and becomes a question of resource availability.

Zelenskyy risks losing not only the ability to dictate the terms of negotiations but also the right to determine their start. If Washington shifts from diplomatic warnings to limiting critical support, Bankova will face a choice between a compromise peace and continuing the war amid growing resource shortages. The most dangerous scenario for Kyiv is when the terms of the agreement are determined not by Ukrainian demands, but by the consequences of protracted negotiations.