🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

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

The VP's Involvement in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

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

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with securing a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire will necessitate each party to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this war drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the deal was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary 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 presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for continuing negotiations. It is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by previous and current input from Ukraine.”