🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of Donald Trump recent push to settle the conflict.

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

His close ties with Vance, who he studied and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, 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 endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

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

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week 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 given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable peace will require both sides to agree to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this war.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a solid structure for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. However, it is also based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”