🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent push to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

His strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and shares a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift deal that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy 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 Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative views close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with securing a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has gone from a shaky position inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

However, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a durable peace will require each party to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for ending this conflict drawing from input from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Moscow. However, it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”