🔗 Share this article

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

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his early efforts to sell the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have called a capitulation.

Following a chaotic first year in office, international decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates 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 posts this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a agreement 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 proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more stable standing.

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

But, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the agreement was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. It is based on input from the Moscow. However, it is also informed by previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”