🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his early attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, who he studied and shares a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have called a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent plan, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the new ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and stop the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians 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 continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his team with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated support of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will require both sides to consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of potential ideas for ending this war based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to explain that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “It is offered as a strong structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. But, it is additionally informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”