🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest effort to settle the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His close ties with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the framework or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal 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 extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting ceasefire will necessitate both sides to agree to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential solutions for ending this conflict based on input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly 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 contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”