🔗 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. His close relationship with Vice President Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his early efforts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to accept a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's key aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter 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 peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

That was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the White House to more stable footing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire 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 ending this conflict based on input from each party of this war.”

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 deal was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document 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 negotiations. It is based on input from the Russian side. However, it is also based on earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”