🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His close connection with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to settle the war.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

After a tumultuous initial year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he added. “It might 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 mainly instructed his staff with securing a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a lasting peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the deal was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

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

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. It is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is also based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”