🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early efforts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have described as 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 top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

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

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the war from restarting.

“Peace will not be made by failed negotiators or officials living in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

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 team with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable footing.

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

But, his first reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a durable peace will require each party to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this war drawing from feedback from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said recently 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 plan pushed by the administration.

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

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by previous and current input from Ukraine.”