🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to settle the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

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

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff 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 latest plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting 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 initial speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

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

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful negotiators or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

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

Rubio's Response and Private Doubts

That was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has gone from a shaky position inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went 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 acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, achieving a durable ceasefire will require each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of possible ideas for ending this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong framework for continuing negotiations. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is also informed by previous and current input from Ukraine.”