🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising envoy for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

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

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have called a capitulation.

After a tumultuous first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

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 obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner 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 leaders to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of possible ideas for resolving this war based on input from each party of this conflict.”

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

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is presented as a strong framework for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on input from the Russian side. However, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”