🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the Trump administration newest 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 negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he studied and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to accept a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive 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 social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials 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 agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will require both sides to agree to difficult but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of possible solutions for resolving this war based on feedback from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the deal was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for continuing negotiations. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”