🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

After a chaotic first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar 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 forceful spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful 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 followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

But, his initial response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will require each party to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this conflict based on input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon 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 representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a strong framework for continuing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”