🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the White House's latest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to settle the war.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early efforts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

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

After a chaotic first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by smart people operating in the real world.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable footing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of possible ideas for resolving this war based on input from each party of this war.”

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 contacted legislators to explain that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is offered as a strong structure for ongoing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”