🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor 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 developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

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

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable footing.

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

But, his initial response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting ceasefire will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential solutions for ending this war drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this day and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is offered as a strong structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”