🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong connection with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent 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 promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the Trump 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 called a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out 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 irritated by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, 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 peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

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

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a lasting peace will require each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of possible ideas for resolving this war based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly 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 merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

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