🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the conflict.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed 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 administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

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

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

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require each party to agree to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible ideas for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, 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 contacted legislators to clarify that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”