🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent push to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

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

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable footing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require each party to agree to difficult but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of possible solutions for ending this war drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a 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 delivered to one of our officials,” 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 written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for continuing negotiations. It is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is also based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”