This naturally affects the entire society, as the quick end of the war is associated with "returning to early February 2022," when expectations of "barbecues in May" prevailed over the realization of the need to mobilize and maintain focus on preventing the country's defeat.1. It is worth recalling that negotiations to end a war never proceed quickly. The Vietnam War lasted nine years, 4.5 of which were negotiations. Negotiations to end the war on the Korean Peninsula lasted two years. During the Yugoslav conflicts, contact groups met for four out of five years while active fighting was ongoing."Therefore, any promises of a quick end to the war through negotiations have no rational basis. Historical experience shows: if a war cannot be ended in the first weeks, it becomes extremely difficult to do so later. An optimistic scenario would be for the war to end in 2026, but even that probability is less than 50%."2. There are different views on the advisability of negotiations, but history shows: if a war is not ended by the complete defeat of the enemy, some document will still emerge in the end. The war in Ukraine is a war of attrition. And it can end in two ways: one side gives up first, or the sides sign a treaty. Theoretically, "black swans" are possible – a sudden death of Putin or a Prigozhin-like rebellion. But this is not a strategy for ending the war – it is hoping for a miracle.A strategy must be based on events that can be influenced. Therefore, the current negotiation process should be considered only as one of the potential ways to end the war. But the attitude towards the country's defense cannot depend on the course of negotiations, just as society should not be fueled with unjustified expectations of "quick peace."3. Meetings between delegations from Ukraine, the U.S., and Europe are not negotiations at all. Negotiations can only be conducted between Ukraine and Russia. Since neither Europe nor Ukraine is conducting direct negotiations with the Russian Federation, the de facto sole negotiator is the current U.S. administration.Perhaps at some stage, the U.S. expected to end the war with a quick agreement with Russia on the surrender of Ukraine. But that is no longer the case. It is indicative that Putin's meeting with Witkoff ended without results."If the U.S. had sought a quick surrender of Ukraine, an agreement could have been announced the same day. The absence of agreements means that Putin was presented with a plan that did not meet the Kremlin's expectations, and he rejected it."Since the U.S. effectively represents the interests of Ukraine and Europe in these negotiations, they must coordinate their position with allies. This is exactly what we see when Umerov travels to the U.S., and Zelenskyy to Paris or London. That is, everything that is happening is a normal diplomatic process. It can lead to the end of the war, but we are only at its beginning, and there is currently no signal that the war will end soon.4. The positions of Ukraine and Russia on ending the war fundamentally diverge. However, even empty rounds of negotiations eventually lead to some convergence of positions. Perhaps someday in the future, these positions will converge at a compromise point. But today there is no hint that this will happen in the near future.All this together means: the war will continue, regardless of how the negotiations proceed. The negotiation process can last for years, and all this time Putin will continue to try to kill more and more people.A responsible government should prepare society precisely for such a scenario, and not produce illusory hopes that "everything will end soon." Therefore, the issue of holding the front line and saving the lives of our soldiers is much more important than discussing peace plans.SourceAbout the author. Mykola Kniazhytskyi, journalist, Ukrainian lawmaker.The editorial board does not always share the opinions expressed by blog or column authors.