🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising envoy for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with Vice President Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

His close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of potential solutions for ending this war drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”