🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent push to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as top aide 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 plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by smart people living in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his staff with securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that went to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable 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 requires an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will require both sides to agree to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a list of possible ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” 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 written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. It is based on input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”