🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration latest proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a key ally of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of Donald Trump recent effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a mediator or statesman, and his initial attempts to sell the deal to officials in Europe were described as turbulent.

His close ties with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the Trump White House in March and insisted he show Trump more courtesy. Currently, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a quick deal that Ukrainian leaders have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be shaped by a small group of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and of course Vance.

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

“All criticism of the peace framework the White House is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Initial Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also attempting to renew ties with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian interlocutors. Leaders in Europe, meanwhile, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their constituents, who Vance said held restrictionist and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

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

In social media updates this weekend, Vance asserted that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the war from restarting.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people living in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who followed up on the introduction of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with securing a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a distinctly more enthusiastic support of the proposal than that given by the secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the government who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was a member of a US delegation that went to Geneva this weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help refine the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

However, his initial reaction to the agreement was tepid:

“Stopping a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and realistic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “And, securing a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will continue to create a set of possible solutions for resolving this conflict based on input from each party of this conflict.”

In private, he was said to be much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds said last week 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 pushed by the administration.

“Rubio made a phone 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 presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to fall in line. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. But, it is additionally based on earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”