🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the war.

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

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the war from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, 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 team with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated 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 stature inside the administration to more stable footing.

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

But, his first reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will require both sides to consent to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a set of potential solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this day 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,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is presented as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”