🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a personal bond, 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 Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or officials living in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation 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.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Doubts

That was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire will require both sides to agree to difficult but necessary compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the deal was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is also based on earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”