🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to settle the war.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or diplomat, and his early attempts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as chaotic.

His strong relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the isolationist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, international decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. 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 views similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a fantasy land,” 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 peace plan in a conversation 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.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone 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 leaders to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a lasting ceasefire will require both sides to agree to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was said to be 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 called legislators to clarify that the deal was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary made a call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is offered as a solid structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on earlier and current contributions from Ukraine.”