^
An impressive kooking list!
* Was every item in that list actually initiated during Trump's regime or were any inherited from the Obama admin?
* There are times when political actions obey an abbreviated version Newton's third law, "Every action has an opposite reaction." "Equality" is difficult to measure over short periods.
Thus, though they had little chance of victory against the Assad-Putin alliance, not supporting the Syrian rebels is, basicaly, a small step in supporting Russia's foothold in the Near/Middle East.
Reducing the aid to Pakistan may, in effect, increase the support for the factions there that support radical/fundamental Islamism. Though, I have to admit, I have little respect for countries with nuclear weapon and/or space programmes and/or severe corruption who claim they need foreign aid.
North Kprea's actions, even when they appear to give in, may reflect their plans and policies mire than that of foreigners. If they give you something be wary of the hidden costs. NK is vurrently cosying up to Russia who have an interest in making things difficult for the West (though the West so often do a pretty good job beating up each other with potential tariff laws etc..)
Analysis could well reveal obvious or hidden downsides to many of these "achievements", but that is so for all political actions - the balance between good and bad is often delicate.
The Chinese and Russians (and Islam) have, traditionally, taken a long view of history, planned for the next century rather than the next four year political term of office. Works well for (near) totalitarisn regimes, long, slow changes can work as well as, or better than, short sharp battles if a regime feels secure in its position.
