🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest push to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and shares a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

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

After a chaotic initial year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the peace framework the White House is developing either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

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 agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to agree to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of potential solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. 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 deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan 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 Russian side. However, it is also based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”