🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

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

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous first year in power, international 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, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the war from restarting.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate both sides to agree to difficult but necessary compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of potential ideas for ending this conflict drawing from feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. 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 merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”