It it quacks like a duck….

Chronological Checklist of Trump’s Major Actions (2016–June 2025)

• Jan 23, 2017 – Withdrawal from TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership): Trump signed an order pulling the U.S. out of the 12-nation Pacific trade pactreuters.com. This fulfilled a campaign pledge but strained ties with Asian allies and ceded regional economic leadership. Observers noted it “distanc[ed] America from its Asian allies” as China’s influence rosereuters.com. By undermining U.S. trade influence, the move weakened U.S. strategic positioning – indirectly aiding rivals like Russia by shifting the balance of power in China’s favor.

• June 1, 2017 – Announces withdrawal from Paris Climate Agreement: Trump announced he would leave the global climate pact, blaming economic costsreuters.com. Experts warned this damaged U.S. global leadership on climate and would raise emissions, potentially adding ~0.3°C to warmingtheguardian.comtheguardian.com. The U.S. thus lost diplomatic influence on environmental issues and undercut international cooperation, while Russia (a major fossil fuel exporter) stood to benefit from looser global climate constraints and weaker U.S. engagement in Arctic/environmental enforcement.

• May 8, 2018 – Withdrawal from Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA): Trump formally exited the 2015 agreement, reinstating sanctions on Irannpr.org. This move alienated U.S. European partners and risked Iranian nuclear development by scuttling established controls. It also pushed Iran closer to Russia as an economic and strategic partner: Russian arms sales and energy deals with Iran expanded once U.S. withdrew, bolstering Moscow’s influence in the Middle East.

• July 16, 2018 – Helsinki Summit with Putin: In a joint press conference, Trump publicly cast doubt on U.S. intelligence findings, siding with Putin’s denial of election interference. Trump stated, “I don’t see any reason why it would be [Russia]”apnews.com. U.S. leaders widely condemned this as undermining national security institutions. Domestically it eroded confidence in U.S. intelligence and democratic processes; internationally it was seen as an unprecedented deference to a hostile power. Russia reaped a public relations win: Putin hailed the summit as a step toward ending Russia’s isolationapnews.com, and Moscow used Trump’s statements to bolster its narrative that U.S. accusations of meddling were baselessapnews.com.

• July 18, 2018 – Undermining NATO: In a televised interview at the G-20 summit, Trump questioned the U.S. commitment to defend Montenegro under NATO’s Article 5, warning it could trigger “World War III”theatlantic.com. By suggesting the U.S. might not automatically protect an ally, he struck at NATO’s core principle. Analysts warned this “undermined the alliance’s credibility” and was an “unprecedented gift to Moscow,” since it echoed long-standing Russian propaganda about NATO’s weaknesstheatlantic.comtheatlantic.com. This approach jeopardized U.S. deterrence in Europe and played into Russia’s strategic goal of weakening NATO unity.

• Oct 6–22, 2019 – Withdrawal from Northern Syria: Trump ordered U.S. forces to pull back from northeastern Syria, allowing Turkey to attack U.S.-allied Kurdish forcesreuters.com. Within weeks, Russian military police deployed to guard the borderreuters.com and Assad’s forces re-entered for the first time in yearsreuters.com. The U.S. had shattered trust with Kurdish and other partners, ceding influence in Syria. Russia directly benefited by filling the vacuum: Moscow brokered the ceasefire and established its forces in critical border regionsreuters.com, significantly boosting its leverage in the Syrian conflict at America’s expense.

• Nov 25, 2020 – Pardon of Michael Flynn: Trump pardoned his former National Security Advisor Flynn, who had pleaded guilty to lying about his contacts with the Russian ambassadornpr.orgnpr.org. This ended a key prosecution from the Russia investigation. Critics said the pardon undermined the rule of law and rewarded misconductnpr.org. By nullifying a conviction tied to the Russian interference probe, the action removed accountability for a Russia-linked offense, which arguably served Russian interests by signaling that U.S. officials could evade consequences for dealings with Moscow.

• Dec 23, 2020 – Pardons of Manafort and Stone (Russia Probe Figures): Trump granted full pardons to Paul Manafort and Roger Stone, two central figures convicted in Special Counsel Mueller’s Russia-collusion probereuters.com. These pardons wiped out “the most important convictions under the long-running Russia election probe”reuters.com. Domestically this sparked bipartisan outrage for undermining justice. It also effectively crippled legal pressure on Russian election meddling: by excusing key conspirators, it diminished deterrence and intelligence-sharing about Russian operations, indirectly benefiting Moscow by letting its election interference go unpunished.

• Jan 6, 2021 – Capitol Attack and Election Denial: Trump’s false claims of a stolen election culminated in a mob storming the U.S. Capitol. The riot inflicted severe damage on American political institutions and global standing by showing deep domestic instability. Russian leadership seized on the chaos: President Putin and state media framed the event as evidence of U.S. hypocrisy. Putin publicly compared the treatment of the Capitol rioters to Russia’s crackdown on dissentapnews.com. In effect, Trump’s actions undermined the credibility of U.S. democracy and fed into Russian narratives that Western political systems were fundamentally flawed.

• Dec 4, 2024 – Ukraine Peace Plan Proposals (Reports): As Trump campaigned for 2024, advisers publicly floated a peace plan for the Russia–Ukraine war that would cede large areas of Ukraine to Russia and explicitly remove any prospect of Ukrainian NATO membershipreuters.com. Such proposals, if adopted, would drastically undercut U.S. support for Ukrainian sovereignty and compromise international norms. Strategically, conceding territory to Russia aligns almost exactly with Russian war aims, effectively granting Moscow a diplomatic victory. Analysts warned these concessions would “leave Russia on the back foot” in leveraging more gainsreuters.com, severely weaken Ukraine’s position, and erode confidence in U.S. commitments—much to Russia’s benefit.

• Feb 28, 2025 – White House Meeting with Ukraine’s President: In a public Oval Office exchange, Trump berated President Zelenskiy and hinted at withdrawing U.S. support unless Ukraine acceded to negotiations with Russiareuters.comreuters.com. The meeting ended abruptly and relations plunged to a new low. U.S. officials and allies viewed this as damaging to the U.S.–Ukraine partnership. By threatening to cut aid and urging peace talks on Russia’s terms, Trump’s actions played into Russia’s strategy of isolating Ukraine and leveraging Western pressure. Ukrainian and Western leaders reacted with alarm, noting that the apparent shift undercut Ukraine’s defense and advanced Russian interests by potentially loosening Western resolve.

• Mar 18, 2025 – Consideration of Recognizing Crimea as Russian: Reports indicated Trump’s administration was considering formally recognizing Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea to help broker a Ukraine peace dealreuters.com. This would mark a profound U.S. policy reversal, abandoning the long-standing position that Crimea is part of Ukraine. Such recognition would severely damage U.S. credibility and undermine the international norm of respecting sovereign borders. It would directly gratify a primary Russian goal—legalizing its annexation—and could yield Russia’s “ultimate prize” without a fight. In short, it would conclusively reward Russia’s aggression and weaken U.S. standing, both in Europe and globally.

• May 19, 2025 – Phone Call with Putin on Ukraine Ceasefire: Trump spoke with Putin about a potential peace memorandum for ending the Ukraine war. The Kremlin publicly hailed the talks as “on the right track.” For the U.S., engaging directly with Russia on Ukraine could risk sidelining Ukrainian interests and non-aligned allies, potentially undermining a unified Western strategy. For Russia, these negotiations were beneficial: they secured high-level U.S. attention and signaled U.S. willingness to negotiate on Russian terms. Putin even agreed to have Russia “work with Ukraine” on a ceasefire plan, a concession that implicitly sought Western legitimization of Russian gains.

• May 28, 2025 – Hesitation on New Russia Sanctions: Trump announced reluctance to impose fresh sanctions on Russia amid ceasefire talksreuters.com. He said he did not want sanctions to “interfere with getting a ceasefire.” This stance alarmed critics who saw it as softening U.S. pressure on Russia at a delicate moment. By holding back punitive measures, Trump risked weakening the Western sanctions regime and emboldening Russian military actions (though he verbally condemned recent Russian bombingsreuters.com). Strategically, it meant that U.S. leverage over Russia’s economy was reduced, thus relieving some pressure on Moscow as it negotiated.

• May 30, 2025 – Envoy Acknowledges Russian Security Concerns (NATO): In Warsaw, Trump’s envoy declared that Russian anxiety about NATO’s eastward expansion was “a fair concern” and affirmed that “Ukraine coming into NATO is not on the table”reuters.comreuters.com. This marked a clear shift from longstanding U.S. policy. For Washington, it undercut Ukraine’s hopes for Western integration and suggested the U.S. might abandon a core post-1989 commitment. For Russia, it was a diplomatic triumph: Moscow has long insisted on a binding guarantee against NATO’s growth into Ukraine. By echoing that position, Trump’s side effectively validated a top Russian demand and granted the Kremlin one of its principal security objectives.

• June 4, 2025 – Call with Putin on Ukrainian Attacks and Ceasefire Talks: Trump spoke by phone with Putin after a Russian military strike campaign in Ukraine. Putin told Trump he “will have to respond” to Ukrainian attacks on Russian targets, while Trump described the call as “good” but not leading to immediate peacereuters.com. Russia reported that ceasefire talks had been “useful.” In practice, this continued Trump’s direct engagement but also highlighted the limits of his influence. The conversation underscored Russian suspicions that Trump’s push for peace served Moscow’s interests in solidifying gains, while U.S. commitments to Ukraine remained uncertain.