🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to settle the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

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, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will require each party to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this war.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

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

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 structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”