🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration newest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to sell the agreement to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky initial visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

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

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the administration is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were irritated by his early speeches, 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.

But, the recently published peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

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

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

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 signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help refine the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will require each party to agree to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason 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.”

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

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “The framework is presented as a strong structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. However, it is also based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”