🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to settle the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by smart people operating in the real world.”

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

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will necessitate each party to consent to difficult but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”