🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with Vice President Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to settle the war.

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

His close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted 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 chaotic first year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful 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 outspoken supporter of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will require both sides to consent to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from feedback from both sides 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 lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary offer 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 presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is presented as a solid structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. However, it is also informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”