There doesn't seem to be enough information to know what is going on, but maybe he wasn't getting anywhere in negotiations, and faced with a deadlock he had to try something different. Now the creditors know he's willing to take risks, and in the event they accept, the changes agreed to may be more palatable given the alternative that has been set in motion (i.e. they can plausibly say we had to agree to these amendments otherwise the risk was too great, where before it wasn't so clear cut)
