🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong connection with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's recent effort to settle the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early efforts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he studied and shares a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have called a surrender.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations 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 said held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates 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 maximalist terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might 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 mainly instructed his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

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

However, 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 pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a lasting peace will require each party to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a list of possible ideas for ending this war based on input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

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

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is presented as a strong structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. However, it is also based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”