🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong connection with Vice President Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated support of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet 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 initial response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to consent to difficult but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of potential ideas for ending this conflict based on feedback from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary made 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 officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is presented as a solid structure for ongoing negotiations. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”