🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the center of Donald Trump recent effort to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, who he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a quick settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Responses

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new 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 under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In posts this past weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the war from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Internal Doubts

That was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more stable footing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will require both sides to consent to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this conflict based on input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the plan. 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 agreement was just a preliminary offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong structure for ongoing discussions. It is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”