🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

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

Following a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

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

Additionally, 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 Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a durable peace will require each party to agree to difficult but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to create a set of potential solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the deal was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”