🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to settle the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous initial 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, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent 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 mainly tasked his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

That was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a uncertain position inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

However, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a lasting peace will require each party to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of possible ideas for resolving this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this day and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”