Would the following work?
If $U(\alpha,\hat n)$ is any $SU(2)$ transformation, and $V$ is also unitary and $2\times 2$, then clearly $V^{-1}\cdot U(\alpha,\hat n).V$ is also in $SU(2)$. Choose for $V$ the matrix that diagonalizes $U(\alpha,\hat n)$. Since the eigenvalues of
$U(\alpha,\hat n)$ are $e^{\pm i\alpha/2}$, this brings $U$ to the form
$U(\alpha,\hat n_3)=e^{-i\alpha\sigma_3}$.
Since $V$ diagonalizes $U(\alpha,\hat n)$, it is the matrix constructed from the eigenvectors of $U(\alpha,\hat n)$ arranged in columns. These eigenvectors are orthogonal and have the form
$$
\left(\begin{array}{c} \cos\beta/2 \\ e^{i\gamma} \sin\beta/2
\end{array}\right)\, ,\qquad
\left(\begin{array}{c} -e^{i\gamma}\sin\beta/2 \\ \cos\beta/2
\end{array}\right)
$$
with $V$ as above, depending on two parameters,
so the matrix $V$ that does the trick is
$$
V=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos \left(\frac{\beta }{2}\right) & -e^{-i \gamma } \sin \left(\frac{\beta }{2}\right) \\
e^{i \gamma } \sin \left(\frac{\beta }{2}\right) & \cos \left(\frac{\beta }{2}\right) \\
\end{array}
\right)=R_z(\gamma)R_y(\beta)R_z(-\gamma)\, .
$$
Summarizing:
\begin{align}
V^{-1}\cdot U(\alpha,\hat n)\cdot V&=U(\alpha,\hat n_3)\, ,\\
U(\alpha,\hat n)&=V\cdot U(\alpha,\hat n_3)\cdot V^{-1}\, .
\end{align}
Edit:
The transformation $V$ is of the form $R_z(\gamma)R_y(\beta)R_z(-\gamma)$, i.e. a conjugation of $R_y(\beta)$, meaning $V$ is
a rotation about the axis $R_z(\gamma)\hat y$ by $\beta$, i.e. it's a rotation in the $xy$ plane, with the axis $\hat y$ rotated by $\gamma$ about $\hat z$. Calling $\hat y'=R_z(\gamma)\hat y$ for simplicity, the transformation $V$ is a rotation about $\hat y'$ by an angle $\beta$. In terms of Pauli matrices, we would have
$$
V= e^{-i\gamma \sigma_z}e^{-i\beta \sigma_y}e^{i\gamma \sigma_z}
=\exp
\left(-i\beta\, [e^{-i\gamma \sigma_z} \sigma_y e^{i\gamma \sigma_z}]\right)\, .
$$