🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an surprising envoy for the Trump administration newest initiative to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. His close relationship with JD Vance has positioned a key ally of the Euroskeptic vice-president at the forefront of President Trump's latest effort to conclude the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or statesman, and his early attempts to sell the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he attended Yale and shares a personal bond, signal the rising influence of the non-interventionist VP in talks to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Vance's Involvement in Ceasefire Efforts

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's rocky first trip to the White House in March and insisted he show Trump more respect. Now, Ukraine is again pushing back against pressure from the US to agree to a quick settlement that local officials have described as a surrender.

Following a chaotic initial year in power, foreign policy actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a handful of Trump's top advisers, such as top aide Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, diplomat Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken 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 objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misunderstands the framework or misstates some key reality on the ground,” Vance wrote.

Early Attempts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to restore ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were angered by his early speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance said held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the recently published peace deal mirrored his stances, and he has been one of the most assertive advocates for the agreement in the government, 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 peace deal would have to produce a truce that honored Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and stop the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by failed negotiators or officials residing in a dream world,” he added. “It might be made by smart people operating in the actual situation.”

It was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his staff with obtaining a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this week in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Internal Concerns

That was a distinctly more enthusiastic endorsement of the plan than that given by the secretary of state and security advisor, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the government who has transitioned from a shaky stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

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

However, his first response to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated recently. “And, securing a durable ceasefire will require both sides to consent to challenging but essential compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for ending this conflict drawing from feedback from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The Republican senator Mike Rounds said last week 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 White House.

“The Secretary did make a call to us this afternoon and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers 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 align himself. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he later wrote. “The framework is offered as a strong framework for continuing discussions. The proposal is derived from feedback from the Russian side. However, it is additionally informed by previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”