🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the conflict.

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

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic first year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or officials residing in a dream world,” he continued. “It might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration 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 weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal 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 realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will require each party to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible solutions for ending this war based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, 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 called lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary made a phone 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 suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is presented as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is additionally based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”