🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the peace framework the White House is developing either misunderstands the framework or misstates some key situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators 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 introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has gone from a shaky position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled 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 authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of possible ideas for ending this war drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Moscow. But, it is also informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”