🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong connection with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

Following a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable standing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, securing a lasting ceasefire will necessitate both sides to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of potential solutions for ending this war drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week 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 plan 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 proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a solid structure for continuing negotiations. It is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is also based on previous and current input from Ukraine.”