🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state 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 Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

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

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that given by the secretary of state 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 footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable 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 requires an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to difficult but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to create a list of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

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

“The Secretary made 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 presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”