🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the White House's newest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Eurosceptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the war.

Prior to his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his initial efforts to sell the deal to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

His strong relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist vice-president in talks to end the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Ceasefire Negotiations

It was Vance who intervened during Volodymyr Zelenskyy disastrous first trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to accept a swift deal that local officials have called a surrender.

Following a tumultuous initial year in office, foreign policy decisions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, State Department head Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All objection of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some critical reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's early attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his early remarks, in which he accused them of running from their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published ceasefire proposal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for endorsing a peace framework that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's extreme demands.

In posts this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to each party, and prevent the war from resuming.

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

Additionally, it was Vance who followed up on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with securing a signature on the ceasefire accord prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Reaction and Private Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more traditional hawk in the government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable standing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough discussion of substantive and pragmatic proposals,” Rubio stated recently. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will require each party to agree to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to create a set of potential solutions for resolving this conflict drawing from input from both sides of this war.”

In private, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the White House.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this day and I think he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our ceasefire proposal.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “This ceasefire plan was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a strong framework for continuing discussions. It is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is additionally informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”