🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to conclude the war.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm footing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will require both sides to consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to develop a set of possible ideas for ending this war drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

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

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. It is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is also based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”