🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of President Trump's latest push to settle the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his early efforts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

Following 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 chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

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

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is presented as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. It is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is also based on earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”