🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent push to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

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

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal 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 endorsing a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by smart people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Concerns

That was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will necessitate both sides to agree to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of potential solutions for resolving this conflict based on feedback from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

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

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is offered as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”