EXPLAINER - How do peace talks actually work, and why do they fail?

Most peace talks fail. Some drag on for years. Others collapse in days. But even when they don’t succeed, they can save lives. From backchannel meetings to battlefield truces, here’s how peace talks actually work — and why making peace is often harder than making war.

Conflict decoded

From Ukraine to Sudan, and Gaza to Colombia, world leaders regularly call for peace. But making peace isn’t as simple as sitting down at a table. Behind every cease-fire and agreement is a complicated web of mistrust, power plays, and human suffering. So how do peace talks really work, and why do so many fail?

What are peace talks?

Peace talks are formal or informal negotiations between warring parties aimed at reducing violence, ending hostilities, or reaching a political agreement. They can be held in secret or under global media attention, and may include governments, armed groups, civil society, or international mediators.

But peace talks are rarely about goodwill, they’re often a strategic tool, used alongside ongoing fighting to gain leverage or buy time.

“Peace talks are not what you do instead of fighting, they’re part of fighting,” one peacebuilding expert explains. “They’re a parallel strategy.”

How often do peace talks fail?

Most of the time.

According to research from Uppsala University, only 13.5% of armed conflicts between 1946 and 2005 ended in a signed peace agreement. The majority either end through victory, military collapse, or a fading of violence, but not through diplomacy.

Even when peace agreements are signed, nearly 40% collapse within five years, often due to spoilers, renewed violence, or loss of public trust.

Why negotiate during war?

It may seem contradictory, but peace talks often happen in the middle of active conflict, not after it ends. In Ukraine, for example, Russia and Ukraine have held multiple rounds of talks since 2022, even while deadly battles rage on.

So what’s the point?

• Cease-fires: Temporary truces can reduce civilian casualties or allow humanitarian aid.
• Humanitarian corridors: Talks can lead to safe evacuation routes or medical access.
• Setting the stage: Even failed talks can build trust or clarify red lines for future diplomacy.

In Sudan’s Nuba Mountains, for example, an early cease-fire in the 2000s helped build the trust needed for broader peace negotiations later.

The biggest obstacles: emotion, power, and mistrust

Peace talks aren’t just about politics — they’re about trauma. Sitting face to face with those accused of killing civilians, bombing homes, or torturing prisoners is an emotionally charged experience. That’s why grief, anger, and mistrust often poison the process.

At the same time, talks require a compelling reason for both sides to come to the table, usually a military stalemate or shared exhaustion.

“You don’t make peace with your friends. You make it with unsavoury enemies,” said former Israeli PM Yitzhak Rabin — who himself was assassinated after signing a peace accord.

What makes peace talks work?

1. Mutual pain
A stalemate where both sides are suffering, but neither can win outright, is often the first step.

2. Skilled mediators
Neutral facilitators can guide talks, prevent breakdowns, and create frameworks for agreement.

3. Inclusivity
When women, ethnic minorities, and local leaders are part of the process, agreements are more likely to last. Northern Ireland’s 1998 peace process and Colombia’s 2016 FARC deal both succeeded in part due to broader participation.

4. Credible guarantees
International backing, peacekeeping forces, or power-sharing arrangements can increase compliance and reduce fear.

Why do peace talks fail?

There are several recurring reasons:

• One side thinks it's winning - and has no reason to compromise (e.g. the Taliban in 2021).
• Talks are used for delay or image control, not real negotiation (e.g. Assad’s strategy in Syria).
• Lack of trust - including safety concerns. Russia was accused of poisoning Ukrainian negotiators in 2022, violating a basic principle of diplomacy.
• Exclusive, elite-driven processes - where people at home feel shut out of the deal and reject it.

Even when talks appear successful on paper, reality is harder. A deal must be sold to the public, often traumatised and angry, and implemented in unstable conditions.

So what can actually help?

Global forums such as the Pearson Global Forum bring together diplomats, academics, and peacebuilders to share lessons and failures. Some key takeaways include:

• Localisation matters: Peace must make sense in the community, not just the capital.
• Security first: In places like Haiti, negotiation is impossible while armed groups still rule streets.
• Sustainable peace takes time: The Northern Ireland and Colombia processes took decades — with false starts, breakdowns, and restarts.

Final takeaway

Peace talks are not a magic fix — they’re a fragile, strategic process that takes years, not days.

They require pressure, patience, and participation. When done right, they can stop bloodshed and rewrite futures. But when rushed or exploited, they collapse, and sometimes make the war worse.

Tags

News Politics peace talks