🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

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

His strong ties with Vance, who he studied and shares a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, 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 working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published 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 criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and stop the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement 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 mainly instructed his team with securing a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a durable peace will require each party to agree to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this conflict drawing from feedback from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical 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 merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a phone 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 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. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for ongoing discussions. It is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is also informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”