🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the conflict.

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

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that local officials have called a surrender.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

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

However, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require each party to agree to difficult but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

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

“The Secretary did make 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 representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”