🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong connection with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent effort to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

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

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

However, his first reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for ending this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to clarify that the agreement was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid structure for continuing negotiations. It is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is also based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”