🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

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

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have called a capitulation.

After a tumultuous 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 adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

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

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm standing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

“The Secretary made a call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Moscow. But, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”