🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more stable standing.

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

However, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire will require both sides to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for resolving this war based on feedback from each party of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the deal was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is presented as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Moscow. However, it is also based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”