🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to settle the war.

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

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published 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 criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a lasting peace will require both sides to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict based on input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be 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 lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”