🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close connection with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent push to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Doubts

That was a distinctly more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a durable peace will require both sides to consent to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from feedback from each party of this conflict.”

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

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on previous and current input from Ukraine.”