🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent effort to conclude the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have called a capitulation.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the administration is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with securing a signature on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Stopping a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a durable peace will require each party to consent to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a list of potential solutions for resolving 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 stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to clarify that the deal was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It 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 subsequently wrote. “It is presented as a strong structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Moscow. But, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”