🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to settle the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

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

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial 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 top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest 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 ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will require both sides to consent to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible ideas for ending this conflict based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“Rubio made a phone 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 officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is offered as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”