🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion 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 latest effort to settle the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous first year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, including top aide 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 plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Responses

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

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could 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 instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

That was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable standing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a durable peace will require each party to consent to difficult but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to create a list of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

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 legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this day and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”