🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's 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.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a chaotic initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and European Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living 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 obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky 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 leaders to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a lasting peace will require both sides to agree to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of potential solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to clarify that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

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

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”