🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to accept a quick settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous first year in office, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the war from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It might be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that went 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 first response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will require each party to consent to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from feedback from each party of this conflict.”

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

“The Secretary did make a call to us this day and I think 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 suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”