🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the war.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

His close ties with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

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

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

That was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm footing.

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

However, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “And, achieving a durable ceasefire will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of potential ideas for resolving this war drawing from feedback from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” said 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. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for continuing discussions. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”