🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent effort to conclude the conflict.

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

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

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Concerns

That was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible ideas for ending this conflict drawing from input from each party of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the deal was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. But, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”