🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

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

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

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

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm footing.

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

But, his first reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate both sides to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of potential solutions for resolving this war based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “It is offered as a solid structure for ongoing discussions. It is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is also based on earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”