🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest effort to settle the war.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial attempts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous first trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent plan, which was crafted 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 misstates some key situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar 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 advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

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

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that expressed 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 administration to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will require both sides to agree to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a list of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“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 offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”