🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to settle the war.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine war.

Vance's Involvement in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a chaotic first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a handful of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and EU Reactions

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

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians living in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Doubts

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

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable ceasefire will necessitate both sides to consent to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will continue to develop a set of potential solutions for ending this war based on input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the White House.

“Rubio did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, 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 negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”