🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the war.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to accept a swift deal that local officials have described as a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative positions close 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 deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a lasting peace will require each party to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the deal was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated 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 later wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is also based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”