🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the White House's newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end 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 insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in power, international actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal 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 under fire for accepting a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

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

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Doubts

That was a distinctly more full-throated 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 gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable standing.

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

However, his initial response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require both sides to agree to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a list of potential ideas for resolving this conflict based on input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

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

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for ongoing negotiations. It is based on feedback from the Moscow. But, it is also based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”