🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the White House's latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of President Trump's latest push to settle the conflict.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's top advisers, 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 supporter of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and European Responses

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

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

But, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential solutions for ending this conflict based on input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is presented as a solid structure for ongoing discussions. The proposal is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally informed by previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”