🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, international actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his staff 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 full-throated endorsement of the proposal 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 White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will necessitate both sides to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a set of potential solutions for ending this war based on input from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a strong structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”