🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent push to settle the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

His close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It 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 resisting pressure from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key aides, 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 vocal supporter of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his staff with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for ending this war based on feedback from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this afternoon 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,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”