🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising envoy for the Trump administration latest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the conflict.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

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

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It might 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 phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a notably more full-throated endorsement 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 firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to agree to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

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

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for ongoing discussions. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”