🔗 Share this article

The US Army Secretary, Daniel Driscoll, emerged as an surprising envoy for the Trump administration newest initiative to end the Russian invasion in Ukraine. His strong relationship with JD Vance has positioned a close associate of the Eurosceptic VP at the forefront of President Trump's latest push to settle the war.

Before his recent visit to Kyiv, Driscoll was not known as a mediator or statesman, and his initial efforts to promote the deal to officials in Europe were labeled chaotic.

His close relationship with Vance, who he studied and maintains a personal bond, indicate the resurgence of the non-interventionist VP in negotiations to resolve the Ukraine war.

The VP's Involvement in Ceasefire 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 courtesy. Now, Ukraine is once again pushing back against demands from the US to accept a swift settlement that local officials have called a surrender.

After a tumultuous initial year in power, international actions in the White House are said to be influenced by a small group of Trump's top aides, including chief of staff Susie Wiles, rightwing advisor Stephen Miller, envoy Steve Witkoff, secretary of state Marco Rubio, and finally Vance.

Vance has been a outspoken advocate of the recent proposal, which was crafted by Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, together with 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,” the VP stated.

Early Efforts and EU Reactions

Vance's early efforts at negotiating a peace deal with Russia, while also seeking to renew ties with Moscow, were unsuccessful and left his team feeling disappointed with their Russian counterparts. European officials, meanwhile, were angered by his initial speeches, in which he accused them of running from their constituents, who Vance claimed held anti-immigration and right-leaning positions similar to those of Trump's own supporters.

But, the recently published ceasefire proposal mirrored his positions, 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 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 ceasefire that respected Ukrainian sovereignty, be acceptable to both sides, and prevent the conflict from restarting.

“A ceasefire will not be made by unsuccessful diplomats or officials living in a dream world,” he continued. “It could be made by intelligent people living 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 obtaining a signature on the peace deal prior to Thanksgiving this Thursday in the United States.

Rubio's Response and Internal Doubts

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

Rubio was part of a US team that traveled to Geneva this past weekend to confer with Ukrainian leaders to help moderate the initial 28-point peace plan in order to make it more palatable to leaders in Kyiv.

But, his initial reaction to the deal was tepid:

“Stopping a complex and deadly conflict such as the one in Ukraine demands an extensive discussion of substantive and realistic proposals,” Rubio wrote over the weekend. “Furthermore, securing a durable peace will necessitate both sides to consent to difficult but essential concessions. That is why we are and will persist to create a set of possible solutions for ending this war based on input from both sides of this war.”

Behind closed doors, he was said to be much more doubtful of the proposal. The GOP lawmaker Mike Rounds stated recently at the Halifax International Security Forum in Nova Scotia that Rubio had contacted lawmakers to explain that the deal was merely a initial proposal from the Russians and not an plan advocated by the White House.

“The Secretary did make a phone 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. “It is not our recommendation, it is not our peace plan.”

Rubio moved quickly to align himself. “The peace proposal was written by the US,” he subsequently stated. “The framework is presented as a solid structure for continuing discussions. The proposal is based on feedback from the Russian side. But, it is also informed by earlier and current input from Ukraine.”