🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to conclude the conflict.

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

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or officials living in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his staff with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has gone from a uncertain position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

However, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a lasting ceasefire will require each party to agree to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of potential ideas for ending this conflict based on input from each party of this war.”

In private, 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 lawmakers to clarify that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”