🔗 Share this article

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

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations 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 demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

That was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm footing.

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

However, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, achieving a durable ceasefire will require each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. 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 agreement was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is also based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”