🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close 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.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his initial attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest plan, 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 developing either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, 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 ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he continued. “It might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff 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 Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

However, his initial response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will require both sides to agree to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential solutions for resolving this war drawing from feedback from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. It is derived from feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”