🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong connection with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early efforts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

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

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction 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 prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will require both sides to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict based on input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the deal was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented 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 authored by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is offered as a strong structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is also based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”