🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's recent push to conclude the war.

Before his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he studied and shares a close friendship, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first visit to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Currently, 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 tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a vocal supporter of the recent proposal, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, 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 conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive spokespeople for the deal in the government, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“Peace will not be made by failed diplomats or officials living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement could be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up 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 peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain stature inside the White House to more firm footing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to meet with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to consent to difficult but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to create a set of possible ideas for resolving this war based on input from both sides of this war.”

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 lawmakers to explain that the deal was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative advocated 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 receivers of a proposal that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was authored by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing negotiations. It is based on input from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on previous and current contributions from Ukraine.”