🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the conflict.

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic first year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every criticism of the peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

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 staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has gone from a shaky stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire will necessitate both sides to agree to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this conflict drawing from feedback from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for continuing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Moscow. But, it is additionally informed by previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”