🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest effort to settle the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced 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 finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a dream world,” he continued. “It could be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

Rubio was part 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 palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting ceasefire will require both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of possible ideas for ending this war based on input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was said to be 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 called 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 made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. It is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on previous and current input from Ukraine.”