🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his early efforts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

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

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a lasting peace will necessitate each party to consent to difficult but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a set of potential solutions for ending this war drawing from feedback from both sides of this conflict.”

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

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this day and I think he emphasized 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 moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing discussions. It is based on input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”