🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the war.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the war from restarting.

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

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky stature 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 initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, achieving a durable peace will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make 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 delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

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