🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the recent proposal, 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 developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a uncertain position inside the administration to more stable footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials 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 conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable peace will require both sides to agree to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I believe he emphasized 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 suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. It is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by previous and current input from Ukraine.”