🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of Donald Trump latest push to settle the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

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

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All criticism of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up 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 Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will require both sides to agree to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of potential solutions for ending this war drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the deal was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is also based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”