🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest effort to settle the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

After a chaotic initial year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

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 fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

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

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

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

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has gone from a shaky position inside the administration to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that went 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 palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of possible solutions for resolving this conflict based on input from both sides of this war.”

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

“The Secretary did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear 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 recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”