🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close connection with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “It might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

That was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a durable peace will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for resolving this war drawing from input from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the deal was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”