🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the White House's newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role 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 respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the framework or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, 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 ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by failed negotiators or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “It could be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of serious and realistic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a list of potential ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party 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 lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. It is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”