🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to settle the conflict.

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

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

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course 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.

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the war from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “It could be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable footing.

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

However, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting ceasefire will necessitate each party to consent to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

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

“The Secretary made a call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is offered as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”