🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

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

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “It might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response 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 conventional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable footing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that went to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “And, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require each party to consent to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to create a list of potential solutions for resolving this war drawing from feedback from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was said to be 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 contacted legislators to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”