🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of Donald Trump recent push to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the deal to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the 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 swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with securing a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his initial response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require both sides to consent to difficult but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of potential ideas for ending this war based on input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the agreement was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is offered as a solid structure for continuing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”