🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his early efforts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a chaotic initial year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal 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 objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the war from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

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 prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed 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 firm footing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will require both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of potential ideas for resolving this war based on input from each party of this war.”

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

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document 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 later stated. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for ongoing discussions. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”