🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to settle the war.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new ceasefire proposal 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 endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

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

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with securing a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state 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 stable standing.

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

But, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will necessitate each party to consent to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a list of potential solutions for ending this war based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is offered as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. It is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”