🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his early efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

His close ties with Vance, who he attended Yale and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that Ukrainian leaders have described as 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 aides, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Early Efforts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a ceasefire plan that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “It might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with securing a signature on the peace deal 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 conventional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a shaky stature inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a lasting ceasefire will necessitate each party to consent to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will continue to create a list of potential solutions for resolving this conflict based on feedback from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the deal was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for ongoing discussions. It is derived from feedback from the Moscow. However, it is also based on previous and current input from Ukraine.”