🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

His close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or officials residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, 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 securing a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

That was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky position inside the White House to more stable standing.

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

But, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

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

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a solid structure for ongoing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”