🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky first visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's top aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

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

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions 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 forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by smart people living in the real world.”

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

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

But, his initial reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, achieving a durable ceasefire will require each party to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a list of potential ideas for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“Rubio 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,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Moscow. However, it is also based on previous and current input from Ukraine.”