Russia claims to have attacked military targets in the harbour, while the agreement only forbids attacks on grain transport infrastructure. If such infrastructure were attacked by Russia, Ukraine would have shared pictures of the damage within hours, but there is nothing.

I've already explained this to you pretty clearly above, but let's go through it once again. When you are unable to dictate to other people, you must negotiate with them. This appears to be a really difficult concept for you to wrap your head around, so let's break it down a bit.

Negotiation doesn't mean that your adversary will always do what they say, and it's not a matter of trust. What negotiation is about is finding situations where both parties are most likely to avoid open conflict because it would be more costly for them than the alternative compromise.

The situation in Ukraine has escalated to the point where Russia decided that conflict is preferable to whatever terms the west offers. They are also winning this conflict, and the west has shown itself to be impotent to reverse the course here.

The situation is a perfect illustration of why avoiding conflicts is a good idea. Before the war started, nobody knew what the relative strengths of Russia and the west were. It was entirely possible that the economic war could've crashed Russian economy as the west gambled, It was possible that the rest of the world would've lined up behind the west instead of Russia, and that Ukrainian military would've stopped Russian invasion.

All of these were possible scenarios, and this gave the west leverage over Russia to negotiate terms. In fact, Russia was willing to do just that for 8 years when they kept waiting for Minks protocols to be implemented. The west chose to ignore Russia's concerns and to continue escalating to the point where Russia decided that they are willing to take the risk of an open conflict.

Now that the conflict happened there are a lot less hypotheticals on the table. Russia now knows that they are able to win militarily. They see that the sanctions failed to affect their economy significantly, and that the blow back in the west is far more severe. And finally, they see that majority of the world is either neutral or actively supporting them.

At this point any leverage that the west had over Russia has evaporated. Now, Russia will continue taking Ukraine apart until they decide to stop, and they will be dictating terms to the west because it's know clear that there is no alternative to Russian energy in Europe.

What path do you see forward for Ukraine? They are continuously losing men and territory. The longer this goes on the more they lose. Time is not Ukraine's side.

This is not accurate. It was in the news report today that the casualties are around 30 soldiers per day. Or… did you count all the civilians to your numbers because you used the word “people”?

News reports clearly state that Ukraine is losing at least 200 soldiers every day. This is what Ukraine themselves says. This doesn't include other casualties which result in additional troops being taken out of combat. If you're going to lie, at least try to find something that can't be googled in a couple of seconds.

You are again claiming that geopolitics isn’t about trust, which is false.

Diplomacy can never be based on trust. If you really don't understand why then I don't know what else to tell you.

And how is that a compromise where bending the knee is the only options east provides?

That's the option that the west has been providing for the past 30 years. Now you get to reap what you sowed. The west does not have the strength to challenge Russia. This means that the west has no hope to challenge China which has a far bigger industrial base. Either the west learns how to talk to countries it doesn't like and to find compromises or it will bend the knee. You can keep screeching here all you like, but that won't change the facts.