🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift deal that local officials have described as a capitulation.

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

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

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government 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 moderate the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate both sides to agree to challenging but necessary compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of potential solutions for ending this conflict drawing from feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a strong structure for continuing discussions. It is based on input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”