🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the war.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter 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 ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

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

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire will require both sides to consent to difficult but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of possible ideas for resolving this war drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

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

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”