🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to settle the war.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Negotiations

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

Following a chaotic first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out 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, in turn, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or officials living in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by smart people living 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 tasked his staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

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

But, his first reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to create a set of potential ideas for ending this war drawing from feedback from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, 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 called legislators to explain that the deal was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is presented as a strong structure for continuing discussions. It is derived from input from the Moscow. But, it is also informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”