🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as 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 vocal advocate of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he continued. “It might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm footing.

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

But, his initial reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of potential solutions for resolving this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical 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 agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers 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 acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is offered as a strong framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Moscow. But, it is also based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”