🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his early efforts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

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

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people living 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 mainly tasked his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of potential solutions for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized 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 recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. It is based on input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”