🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he studied and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions 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 forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with securing a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to meet 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 deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a lasting ceasefire will require both sides to agree to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a list of possible solutions for resolving this war based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. But, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”