🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

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

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up 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 Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic 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 stature inside the administration to more stable footing.

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

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will require each party to consent to challenging but necessary compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from feedback from each party 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 explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing negotiations. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. But, it is also informed by previous and current input from Ukraine.”