🔗 Share this article

The US Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, was an unlikely envoy for the Trump administration latest proposal to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Driscoll's close connection with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Euroskeptic VP at the center of Donald Trump recent push to settle the conflict.

Before his last week's visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was unrecognized as a negotiator or diplomat, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to European policymakers were described as chaotic.

Driscoll's close relationship with Vance, with whom 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 Involvement in Peace Negotiations

This was Vance who intervened during Ukraine's president's disastrous initial trip to the Trump White House in March and demanded he show Trump more respect. Currently, Ukraine is again resisting pressure from the US to agree to a swift settlement that local officials have described as a capitulation.

After a tumultuous initial year in office, international actions in the White House are reportedly influenced by a handful of Trump's top aides, including top aide Susie Wiles, conservative advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

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

“All criticism of the peace framework the administration is developing either misinterprets the proposal or misstates some key reality on the ground,” the VP stated.

Initial Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's initial attempts at hammering out a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to renew relations with Moscow, were fruitless and left his camp feeling frustrated with their Russian counterparts. European officials, in turn, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of ignoring their voters, who Vance claimed held restrictionist and right-leaning views close to those of Trump's own supporters.

However, the new peace deal closely resembled his stances, and he has been one of the most forceful advocates for the agreement in the administration, even as the US has been criticized for accepting a peace framework that mostly echoes Vladimir Putin's extreme terms.

In social media updates this weekend, Vance argued that a peace deal would have to establish a truce that honored Ukrainian independence, be agreeable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from resuming.

“A ceasefire won’t be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials residing in a fantasy land,” he added. “An agreement might be made by smart people living in the actual situation.”

Additionally, it was Vance who continued on the presentation of the ceasefire proposal in a conversation with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump had primarily instructed his staff with obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

The Secretary of State's Response and Private Concerns

Vance's stance was a distinctly more full-throated support of the plan than that given by the top diplomat and national security adviser, Marco Rubio, a more conventional hardliner in the administration who has transitioned from a uncertain stature inside the administration to more firm footing.

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

However, his initial reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Ending a complicated and violent conflict such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive discussion of substantive and realistic ideas,” Rubio wrote recently. “And, achieving a durable peace will necessitate each party to agree to challenging but necessary compromises. That is why we are and will persist to develop a set of potential ideas for resolving this conflict drawing from input from each party of this war.”

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 contacted legislators to explain that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the administration.

“The Secretary did make a phone call to us this day and I believe he made it very clear to us that we are the receivers of a offer that was delivered to one of our representatives,” stated Rounds. “It is not our suggestion, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he later stated. “It is offered as a strong structure for ongoing negotiations. It is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by earlier and ongoing input from Ukraine.”