🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance'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 agree to a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, 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 ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and stop the war from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement could be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with securing a signature on the peace deal 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 support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a lasting ceasefire will require each party to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of possible ideas for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this war.”

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

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a solid structure for ongoing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”