🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

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

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

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

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

That was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will necessitate both sides to agree to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of possible ideas for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

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

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is offered as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”