🔗 Share this article

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

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

After a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

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

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats 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 securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has gone from a shaky position inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent war 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 consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to create a set of possible ideas for ending this war based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

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

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a strong structure for ongoing discussions. It is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is also based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”