🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the conflict.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, who he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor 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 developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

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

Early Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by smart people operating in the real world.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Doubts

That was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will require both sides to agree to challenging but necessary compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

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

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

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is offered as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”