🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent push to settle the war.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's top 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 vocal supporter of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new ceasefire proposal 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 under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and stop the war from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or officials living in a fantasy land,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has gone from a shaky stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his first reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require both sides to consent to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of potential ideas for ending this war based on feedback from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the deal was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary made a call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”