🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of Donald Trump latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip 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 swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

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

“Peace will not be made by failed negotiators or officials living in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more firm footing.

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

However, his initial response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of possible ideas for resolving this war drawing from feedback from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to clarify that the agreement was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing discussions. It is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”