🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the White House's latest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to settle the war.

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his initial attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were labeled chaotic.

Driscoll's close ties with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a close friendship, signal the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Role in Peace Efforts

This was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against demands from the US to agree to a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have called a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“Every objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misrepresents some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also attempting to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a ceasefire plan that largely resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

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

“Peace won’t be made by failed diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by smart people living in the real world.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with obtaining a agreement on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hardliner in the administration who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian officials to help moderate the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his initial response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complicated and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will require each party to agree to challenging but essential concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of potential ideas for ending this conflict drawing from feedback from each party of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be 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 legislators to clarify that the agreement was just a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” said 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 stated. “The framework is offered as a solid framework for ongoing discussions. It is derived from input from the Moscow. However, it is additionally based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”