🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to settle the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit 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 deal that local officials have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for resolving this war drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for continuing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”