🔗 Share this article

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

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in office, international decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the latest plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

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

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued 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 Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has gone from a shaky position inside the administration to more stable footing.

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

However, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of potential solutions for resolving this war drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

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

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this day 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 fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a strong structure for continuing negotiations. It is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”