Greece is staring to make contingency plans; Ambrose Evans-Pritchard reports that the government has designed new drachmas. But he argues that neither side holds the upper hand, since the prospect of a powerful Grexit is a powerful weapon.

That view may be part of what is informing the sometimes self-sabotaging aggressive Greek posture. And it may not be accurate. The US and UK press have expressed more concern about the risk of a Greek departure from the Eurozone. And recall that it took a lot of external pressure on Germany, not just from the US and UK governments, but from NATO too, to get Merkel to rein in Schauble.

However, the concern that led Eurogroup to relent may not have been about a Greek departure, but a disorderly Grexit. If enough of the hardliners (the ECB, the IMF, and the more bloody-minded members of the Eurogroup) share that view, Greece's likely assumptions about its negotiating leverage, and what degree of concessions its "partners" are prepared to make would prove to be off base.

Now, I must say I disagree with most of what Yves' writes in this article.
There is no good faith here, the negotiations are at least partly conducted for the benefit of the audience and there is no way that Spain and Portugal will be anything less than hostile. One of the few assets Greece has is that the Eurogroup's case is macoeconomic nonsense and in a fair discussion they look like clowns compared to Varoufakis. So letting him continue to talk with journalists is essential. Greece has no other way to plant a news story and would completely loose any track in the bigger societal discussion.
She also puts still too much faith in stories based on "officials'" take on things even after the earlier draft wars have shown that the Euro side has no compunction about bare face lying.

still her take is based on years of experience negotiating in the financial sector and not an irrational fear of Tony Blair lurking under the bed.