🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in power, foreign policy decisions 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, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal 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 under fire for accepting a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up 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 ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that went to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will require both sides to consent to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a set of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

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

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Moscow. But, it is additionally based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”