🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of President Trump's latest push to settle the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift deal that local officials have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework 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 respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “It could be made by intelligent 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 primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

That was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled 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 acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will necessitate both sides to agree to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a set of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the deal was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for continuing discussions. It is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is also based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”