🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the war.

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

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, who he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In posts this past 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 resuming.

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

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with securing a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a lasting ceasefire will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he later stated. “It is presented as a solid structure for continuing negotiations. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”