🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

Following a chaotic first year in office, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, 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 developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. 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 right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a durable peace will require both sides to agree to challenging but necessary compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible solutions for resolving this war drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the deal was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for continuing discussions. It is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is also based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”