🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the war.

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

His close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

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. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's key advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is developing either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople 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 social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will require each party to agree to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a list of possible ideas for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the deal was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is presented as a solid structure for ongoing discussions. It is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is also based on earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”