🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to settle the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

It 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. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, 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 peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “It might be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

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

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

However, his initial response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will require each party to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a list of potential solutions for resolving this war based on input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized 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 suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. It is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is also based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”