🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's key aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration 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 forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by smart people living in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

That was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his initial response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire will require each party to consent to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a list of potential ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”