🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent push to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with securing a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a durable peace will require each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”