🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest 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 forefront of President Trump's latest push to settle the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the isolationist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to accept a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic first year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of possible ideas for ending this conflict based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the agreement was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day 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 suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is also based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”