🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's recent push to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. 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 restrictionist and conservative views 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 forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff 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 distinctly more full-throated support of the proposal 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 position inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went 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 acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a lasting ceasefire will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible solutions for resolving this war based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be 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 legislators to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is presented as a solid structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Moscow. But, it is also based on previous and current input from Ukraine.”