🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent push to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal 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 under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly 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 Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more stable footing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “And, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for ending this war based on feedback from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the deal was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary made a call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, 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 solid framework for continuing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is also based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”