🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to settle the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

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

Following a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the recent 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 peace framework the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, 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 peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, 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 securing a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

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

But, his initial response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require each party to agree to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict based on input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated 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 plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by previous and current input from Ukraine.”