🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of Donald Trump recent push to settle the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky first visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous initial year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this 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 conflict from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or officials residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

That was a notably more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet 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 first reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will require both sides to consent to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict based on input from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“Rubio did make a call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is offered as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”