🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an unlikely diplomat for the White House's latest proposal to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of Donald Trump latest push to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his early efforts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

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

The VP's Role in Peace Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is once again resisting pressure from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

After a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative adviser Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken supporter of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the peace framework the administration is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Efforts and European Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while also seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial remarks, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and conservative positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the deal in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that largely echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist terms.

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

“Peace will not be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Concerns

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

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

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a lasting ceasefire will require both sides to consent to difficult but necessary concessions. This is the reason we are and will continue to create a set of potential solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more skeptical of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called legislators to explain that the deal was just a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio acted swiftly to align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is presented as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. It is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by previous and current input from Ukraine.”