🔗 Share this article

America's Army Secretary, Dan Driscoll, emerged as an surprising diplomat for the Trump administration newest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has placed a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the center of Donald Trump latest push to settle the war.

Prior to his recent trip to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his early attempts to promote the deal to European policymakers were described as turbulent.

His strong ties with Vance, with whom he studied and maintains a close friendship, indicate the rising influence of the non-interventionist vice-president in negotiations to end the Ukraine crisis.

The VP's Involvement in Peace Efforts

It was Vance who stepped in during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial visit to the White House in March and demanded he show Trump more courtesy. Now, 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 decisions in the White House are reportedly shaped by a small group of Trump's top advisers, such as chief of staff 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 plan, which was developed by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, alongside the Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev.

“All objection of the peace framework the White House is working on either misinterprets the framework or misrepresents some critical reality on the ground,” Vance stated.

Early Attempts and EU Responses

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a ceasefire agreement with Russia, while simultaneously seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his team feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. Leaders in Europe, in turn, were irritated by his early speeches, in which he charged them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning positions close to those of Trump's own constituency.

However, the new ceasefire proposal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful spokespeople for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been under fire for endorsing a ceasefire plan that mostly resembles Vladimir Putin's maximalist demands.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a ceasefire agreement would have to establish a truce that respected Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to each party, and stop the conflict from restarting.

“Peace won’t be made by failed negotiators or politicians residing in a dream world,” he added. “An agreement might be made by intelligent people operating in the real world.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the peace plan in a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily tasked his team with securing a agreement on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

Vance's stance was a notably more full-throated endorsement of the plan than that expressed by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hawk in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain position inside the administration to more firm standing.

Rubio was part of a US team that went to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the original 28-point ceasefire proposal in order to make it more acceptable to authorities in Kyiv.

But, his first reaction to the deal was lukewarm:

“Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine demands an thorough exchange of serious and pragmatic ideas,” Rubio stated over the weekend. “Furthermore, achieving a durable peace will require each party to consent to difficult but essential compromises. This is the reason we are and will persist to develop a set of potential solutions for resolving this conflict based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

Behind closed doors, he was reportedly much more skeptical of the plan. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated last week at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted legislators to clarify that the agreement was just a initial offer from the Russians and not an initiative pushed by the administration.

“Rubio made a phone call to us this day and I believe he emphasized to us that we are the recipients of a offer that was presented to one of our officials,” stated Rounds. “The document is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio acted swiftly to fall in line. “The peace proposal was authored by the US,” he subsequently wrote. “It is presented as a solid framework for continuing negotiations. The proposal is based on input from the Moscow. But, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing contributions from Ukraine.”