🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the conflict.

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

His close ties with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, international actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's key advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal advocate 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 White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. European officials, in turn, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that largely resembles 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 both sides, and prevent the war from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he continued. “It could be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the administration to more stable footing.

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

But, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable ceasefire will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of potential solutions for ending this war based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a initial offer from the Russians and not an plan pushed by the administration.

“The Secretary made a call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. It is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is also informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”