🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to settle the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial attempts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal 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 White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction 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 national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

But, his first reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will require both sides to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of possible ideas for ending this conflict drawing from input from each party 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 contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “It is offered as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”