🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he added. “It might be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with securing 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 distinctly more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

However, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will require both sides to agree to difficult but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will continue to develop a set of potential ideas for ending this war drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, 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 called legislators to clarify that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”