🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising envoy for the Trump administration latest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were labeled turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a swift deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

Following a tumultuous first year in office, international actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the latest proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every objection of the peace framework the administration is working on either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the war from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “It could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his staff with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance 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 gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more firm standing.

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

But, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, achieving a durable peace will require each party to agree to challenging but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a list of possible solutions for ending this conflict based on input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers 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 think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong structure for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”