🔗 Share this article

America's Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration latest initiative to end the conflict in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's recent push to settle the war.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to promote the agreement to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

Driscoll's strong ties with Vance, who he studied and maintains a close friendship, signal the rising influence of the isolationist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Role in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous first visit to the Trump White House in March and demanded 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 called a capitulation.

Following a chaotic first year in office, foreign policy actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a small group of Trump's key aides, such as chief of staff Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's relative Jared Kushner, together with the Russian diplomat Kirill Dmitriev.

“Every criticism of the ceasefire plan the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misstates some critical situation on the ground,” the VP stated.

Early Attempts and European Reactions

Vance's initial efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and conservative positions similar to those of Trump's own constituency.

But, the new peace deal closely resembled his positions, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the government, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that largely echoes 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 independence, be acceptable to each party, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“Peace won’t be made by unsuccessful negotiators or politicians living in a fantasy land,” he continued. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the real world.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had mainly instructed his team with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal before Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Doubts

That was a notably 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 government who has gone from a uncertain position inside the White House to more stable footing.

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

But, his first response to the agreement was tepid:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “And, securing a durable peace will require each party to consent to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a list of possible solutions for resolving this war 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 said recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had called lawmakers to explain that the agreement was merely a preliminary proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“Rubio did make a phone call to us this afternoon and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our representatives,” said Rounds. “The document is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is offered as a solid structure for ongoing negotiations. It is based on feedback from the Moscow. But, it is additionally based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”