🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising envoy for the White House's latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent 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 sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts 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. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with securing a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will require each party to consent to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document 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. “The framework is offered as a strong structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”