🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the Trump administration latest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the center of President Trump's recent push to settle the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy rocky first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a quick deal that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and European Responses

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a peace deal would have to produce a ceasefire that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people operating in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly tasked his team with obtaining a signature on the ceasefire accord before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional 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 past weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his initial response to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate both sides to agree to challenging but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of possible solutions for resolving this war based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to clarify that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“Rubio made a call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. The proposal is derived from input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on earlier and current input from Ukraine.”