🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a swift deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

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

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that went to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a lasting ceasefire will require each party to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this war drawing from input from each party of this war.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the deal was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan pushed 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 receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for continuing negotiations. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”