🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

This 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. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have called a capitulation.

After a chaotic first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's key advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the White House is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's early attempts at negotiating 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 irritated by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, 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 largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by intelligent 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 mainly instructed his staff with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

But, his initial reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

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

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”