🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his initial attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

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

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response 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 traditional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a lasting peace will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a list of potential solutions for resolving this war based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary 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 proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”