🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration newest proposal 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 forefront of President Trump's recent push to settle the conflict.

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

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is once again resisting demands from the US to accept a quick deal that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic first year in power, international decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's key advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the latest proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the White House is developing either misunderstands the framework or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Efforts and European Responses

Vance's early attempts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal closely resembled 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 endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this past weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to each party, and prevent the war from restarting.

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

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

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

Vance's stance was a notably more enthusiastic support 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 position inside the administration to more stable standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the original 28-point peace plan in order to make it more acceptable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive exchange of serious and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a lasting peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a set of potential ideas for resolving this war based on feedback from each party of this war.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary made a call to us this day and I think he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing discussions. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is also based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”