🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

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

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

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore 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 voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

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

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Private Doubts

That was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a lasting ceasefire will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a list of possible ideas for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”