🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising envoy for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to settle the conflict.

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to accept a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All criticism of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

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

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team 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 response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker 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 merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”