🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that local officials have called a capitulation.

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, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state 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, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm footing.

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

However, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will require both sides to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a list of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I think 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 ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”