🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was 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 positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of Donald Trump recent push to settle the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff 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 recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“Peace will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

But, his initial reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to agree to difficult but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to develop a set of potential solutions for resolving this conflict based on feedback from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”