🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, 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 endorsing a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

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

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats 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 instructed his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has gone from a shaky stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

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

However, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will require each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of potential ideas for resolving this war based on input 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 said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated 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 delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”