🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, who he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky initial trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky position inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting ceasefire will require each party to agree to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of possible ideas for ending this conflict based on input 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 recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I think 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 moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”