🔗 Share this article

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

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views 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 assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

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

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

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable footing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that went to Geneva this past 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 reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful 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 explain that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio 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 peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is offered as a strong structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. However, it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”