The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent push to conclude the war.
Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.
Driscoll's close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.
It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift deal that local officials have called a surrender.
After a chaotic initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.
Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.
“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.
Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.
However, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.
In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.
“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”
Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.
That was a notably more full-throated support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more stable footing.
Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.
But, his initial response to the deal was tepid:
“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a durable peace will require each party to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible ideas for resolving this war drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”
In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the deal was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.
“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”
Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Moscow. But, it is also informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”
Elena Hartwell is a multidisciplinary artist and educator passionate about fostering creative communities in London.