🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

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

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, achieving a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said 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 proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”