🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken 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 working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore relations 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 running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and stop the war 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 smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a agreement on the peace deal before 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 plan than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will require both sides to agree to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of possible solutions for ending this war based on input from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful 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 merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. But, it is additionally based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”