🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

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

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some key situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative views close to those of Trump's own constituency.

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

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to establish a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from restarting.

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he continued. “It 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 phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Concerns

That was a notably more full-throated support of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting ceasefire will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to develop a set of possible ideas for ending this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the proposal. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is offered as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by previous and current input from Ukraine.”