🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent push to conclude the conflict.

Prior to his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or diplomat, and his early efforts to promote the agreement to officials in Europe were labeled turbulent.

His close relationship with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and maintains a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is once again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a swift deal that local officials have described as a capitulation.

Following a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key advisers, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All criticism of the ceasefire plan the administration is developing either misunderstands the proposal or misstates some key situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were irritated by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for accepting a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed diplomats or politicians residing in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by intelligent people living in the real world.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated endorsement of the proposal than that expressed by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a shaky position inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian officials to help refine the initial 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

However, his first response to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent war such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, securing a lasting peace will require each party to agree to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of potential ideas for ending this conflict based on feedback from each party of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more doubtful of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the agreement was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an initiative advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this afternoon and I think he emphasized to us that we are the receivers 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 authored by the US,” he later wrote. “It is offered as a strong structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally based on earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”