🔗 Share this article

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

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to accept a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous first year in power, international actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he charged them of ignoring their voters, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the White House to more firm standing.

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

However, his first reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will require each party to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of possible ideas for ending this conflict drawing from feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”