🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the latest plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more stable footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “And, achieving a lasting peace will require both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for ending this war based on input from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical 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 explain that the agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated 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 proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid structure for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. But, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”