🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first trip 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 swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state 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, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, 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 mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the real world.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal 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

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

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

However, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will require both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible ideas for resolving this war based on input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Moscow. But, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”