🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, international actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the latest plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is developing either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the real world.”

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 obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan 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 uncertain position inside the administration to more stable 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 initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of potential solutions for resolving this war drawing from feedback from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a 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 ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”