🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in 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 described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are said to be shaped by a handful of Trump's key advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative 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 key reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

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

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It could be made by smart 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 team with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US team 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 acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from feedback from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. 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 agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing discussions. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”