🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the conflict 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 recent effort to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his early efforts to sell the deal to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, 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 mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “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 conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with securing a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

That was a notably more full-throated support of the plan 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 position inside the administration to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of potential solutions for resolving this war based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical 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 deal was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”