🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the war.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

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 deal that local officials have called a capitulation.

After a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head 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, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

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

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

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with securing a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner 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 past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a set of potential ideas for ending this war based on input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly 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 lawmakers to clarify that the deal was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document 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 later wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”