🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising envoy for the White House's latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have described as a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

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

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by smart people operating in the real world.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

But, his initial response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will necessitate each party to agree to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a set of potential ideas for resolving this war based on input from each party of this war.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to clarify that the deal was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for ongoing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is also informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”