One year and one day: what were the 365 days of Trump’s second presidential term like?
21 January 20:09
Donald Trump’s second presidential term was an event that immediately went beyond the usual political cycle. The politician’s return to the White House meant not just a change of administration, but a return to a course that had already broken the established rules of American and world politics. While many viewed Trump’s first term as an exception or a political experiment, his second term finally dispelled these illusions, turning “Trumpism” into a systemic phenomenon.
From the first days of the new presidency, the US faced drastic decisions in domestic policy, aggressive foreign rhetoric, and a rethinking of America’s role in the world. Allies found themselves under pressure, opponents gained unexpected opportunities, and the United States itself increasingly acted according to the logic of situational advantage rather than long-term principles.
[Komersant] summed up the first year of Donald Trump’s second term and analyzed how his decisions, conflicts, and ambitions are changing not only America but also the global order, the consequences of which the world will feel for many years to come.
Territorial ambitions announced at the inauguration
Donald Trump’s second presidential term began with sensational statements about the possible expansion of the United States. In his inaugural speech on January 20, 2025, he announced the beginning of “America’s golden age” and effectively formulated a new foreign policy concept — the so-called “Donro Doctrine.” It was a modern reinterpretation of the Monroe Doctrine and envisaged the unquestionable dominance of the US in the Western Hemisphere.
Trump did not just talk about the abstract greatness of the country: he openly declared his intention to restore American control over the Panama Canal, citing “unfair tariffs” for the US. At the same time, the president did not rule out even a forceful scenario.
From the very beginning, it was clear that the Trump administration did not intend to consider existing borders inviolable when it came to economic benefits or “national interests.” This set the tone for the year, during which territorial claims in an openly imperial, almost “Putin-esque” style became one of the key themes of White House policy.
Quarrel in the Oval Office
One of the most resonant diplomatic incidents was Donald Trump’s meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on February 28, 2025. The negotiations in the Oval Office, which were broadcast live, quickly escalated into a sharp and public conflict. Trump, together with Vice President Jay D. Vance, put intense pressure on the Ukrainian leader, insisting on an immediate cessation of hostilities and the start of negotiations with Russia.
The Ukrainian delegation responded just as sharply, which also went beyond the bounds of established diplomatic etiquette. The tension was preceded by a statement by Trump, who shortly before the meeting called Zelensky a “dictator without elections,” appealing to the impossibility of holding a vote during the war.
The consequences of the conflict were not long in coming: the White House immediately froze military and intelligence assistance to Ukraine, making it a condition for agreeing to a truce. Although some of the support was formally resumed after Kyiv agreed to a 30-day ceasefire, the level of trust between the parties was effectively destroyed. Trump made it clear that further support for Ukraine would only be possible if his demands were fully met.
Global tariff confrontation
In April 2025, Trump proclaimed the so-called “America’s Liberation Day.” This name concealed a large-scale tariff campaign that came as a shock to the global economy. Taking advantage of the IEEPA law, the president introduced a universal 10% duty on all imports, as well as additional tariffs against countries with the largest trade imbalances with the US.
Even Washington’s traditional allies were hit: for the European Union, the average tariff level rose to about 20%. The decision caused turbulence in financial markets and led to higher prices for goods within the United States itself.
Despite economists’ warnings about inflation and recession, Trump insisted that tariffs would force foreign corporations to move production to the US and ultimately “make America great again.” Throughout the year, tariffs remained a key instrument of political pressure: the president repeatedly threatened Brazil, India, Denmark, France, and other partners with new restrictions, demanding concessions.
Trump has effectively set out to destroy Russia
At the same time, Taras Zagorodniy, managing partner of the National Anti-Crisis Group and political expert, urges caution in making final assessments of Donald Trump’s second term. According to him, one year of presidency is still too short a period.
“It is difficult to say anything definitive yet, because only a year has passed. Some things are working out for him, some are not. But the overall trends are positive for us,” the expert notes.
Zagorodniy emphasizes that a year ago he predicted that Donald Trump would eventually put pressure on Russia, but the scale of the US president’s actions exceeded expectations.
“I said that Trump would defeat Russia after all. But I did not expect that he would actually proceed to its liquidation,” he emphasizes.
The expert cites US policy on the oil market as a key factor.
“What he is doing with the oil market is establishing complete control. In this configuration, there is simply no such country as Russia. This means the disintegration of Russia, and they will not be able to escape it,” Zagorodniy explains.
According to him, Trump is acting primarily in the interests of American oil companies and will not be able to stop this process even if he wants to.
Separately, the expert draws attention to the change in Europe’s behavior, which, in his opinion, is a consequence of Trump’s tough policy.
“I didn’t expect them to take Europe so seriously. But Europe is starting to move in the right direction. There, excuse me, the fat has been trimmed a little,” says Zagorodniy.
He emphasizes that European countries have finally found the resources to support Ukraine.
“They found money for Ukraine. They are starting to move in the right direction to really help Ukraine. This makes Europe more proactive,” adds the expert.
Taras Zagorodniy also believes that the Trump administration is systematically working to dismantle the so-called “axis of evil.”
“Trump is eliminating this military-political bloc that existed: Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and partly China. These are no longer just words, but concrete actions,” he notes.
Ukraine’s strategic initiative
In conclusion, the expert emphasizes that the current US policy creates new opportunities for Ukraine.
“I believe this is a very positive trend for us. It allows us to say that Ukraine has seized the strategic initiative. The US is not opposed to this,” Zagorodniy emphasizes.
According to him, Ukraine has gained space to realize its own military potential.
“Ukraine is realizing its military potential directly on the territory of the Russian Federation,” the expert concludes.
Public break with Elon Musk
One of the most dramatic stories of the year was the breakdown of the alliance between Donald Trump and his ally and donor Elon Musk. After the inauguration, Musk gained unprecedented influence, heading the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), designed to reduce government spending.
However, by June 2025, the partnership had fallen apart over disputes surrounding Trump’s key bill, “One Big Beautiful Bill.” Musk publicly called the document “disgusting filth” and accused it of leading the US to financial disaster.
The president’s response was extremely aggressive: Trump ridiculed the billionaire, saying that he had “gone crazy” after the cancellation of subsidies for electric cars, and also threatened to review SpaceX and Starlink’s government contracts. He even raised the possibility of deporting Musk, despite his American citizenship.
Musk responded by talking about creating his own “American Party” and transparently hinting at the existence of compromising information on Trump in the Epstein case. Only in the fall did the conflict gradually fade away, and both sides began to move toward reconciliation.
Anchorage: Putin’s symbolic return
On August 15, 2025, a landmark meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin took place in Anchorage, Alaska. The Russian president was received with extraordinary honors: a red carpet at the airbase, a flyover by F-22 fighters and B-2 bombers, and a joint trip by the leaders in an armored presidential limousine during a closed conversation.
Trump showed exceptional affection for Putin, calling him a “great neighbor” and claiming to have reached agreements on most issues. However, the summit did not produce any practical results: neither peace nor even a ceasefire in Ukraine. Instead, the meeting signaled the US’s willingness to symbolically bring the Russian leader out of international isolation.
This gesture embodied the Trump administration’s new approach, in which personal sympathies for authoritarian leaders are placed above international rules, collective security, and basic common sense.
Operation Midnight Hammer and strikes on Iran
In June 2025, the Middle East was once again on the brink of a large-scale conflict. The US, together with Israel, launched Operation Midnight Hammer, delivering massive air strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Trump later claimed on social media that Iran’s nuclear program had been “completely destroyed,” although intelligence reports indicated only partial damage.
The escalation was accompanied by Washington’s unconditional support for Israel. In late 2025 and early 2026, Trump also openly addressed the Iranian people, calling for the overthrow of the regime during mass protests and promising US support. He repeatedly emphasized that American troops were on full combat alert and threatened new, even harsher strikes.
However, as of January 20, 2026, these threats had not gone beyond loud rhetoric.
Venezuela
This Latin American country was among the key areas of Donald Trump’s foreign policy. Washington consistently refused to recognize Nicolás Maduro as the legitimate head of Venezuela, accusing his regime of cooperating with international drug cartels and facilitating drug trafficking.
Under the banner of combating drug trafficking, in August 2025 the US launched military action against Latin American groups transporting cocaine through the Caribbean. These operations soon escalated into a large-scale military campaign, in which the United States effectively imposed a naval blockade on Venezuela.
For several months, the US military stopped and detained ships and oil tankers leaving Venezuelan ports. At the end of the year, the confrontation reached its peak: the US carried out a series of air strikes on targets within the country. In early 2026, the conflict reached its climax when Nicolas Maduro captured an American special forces unit directly at his residence and secretly transported them to the United States, where a trial is planned.
However, contrary to the expectations of the Venezuelan opposition, Washington’s actions did not lead to the fall of the regime and probably did not even have that goal. Instead, the Trump administration focused on weakening the old power elites associated with Maduro. At the same time, the US president did not hide the real motive behind American activity — the key interest remains Venezuela’s colossal oil reserves.
Canada and Greenland
Although Donald Trump regularly criticized traditional US allies, certain countries found themselves under particularly close scrutiny from the White House. In the spring of 2024, the US president publicly voiced a number of complaints about Canada concerning trade relations, migration policy, and security issues.
At the same time, Trump and his entourage actively promoted the idea of Canada possibly joining the US as the “51st state.” This rhetoric became so widespread that it prompted an official response from Ottawa. Relations between the two countries cooled sharply. The White House later abandoned its overt territorial claims, but the diplomatic damage had already been done.
Over time, Trump’s focus shifted to Greenland, which he also began to consider as a possible “annexation” target. The president justified this with arguments of US national security.
After a brief pause, interest in the island flared up again with renewed vigor in early 2026. Trump resumed public pressure, openly questioning Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland and threatening European countries with trade sanctions if they resisted the American course.
The aggressive territorial rhetoric that the US administration systematically used throughout the year seriously undermined confidence in Washington as a pillar of the international order. American allies are increasingly forced to distance themselves from Trump’s unpredictable policies and seek alternative centers of partnership.
Donald Trump’s first year as president has left more questions than answers. He has demonstrated a willingness to make tough and uncompromising decisions — both in domestic policy and on the international stage — regardless of the position of partners and allies.
His fight against immigration has gradually turned into an attack on the powers of individual states, which form the foundation of the American federal system.
However, the most striking changes concern the external role of the United States. The new administration has made it clear that it is prepared to cooperate with authoritarian regimes for short-term gains. At the same time, traditional US allies have faced trade restrictions and unfounded territorial claims. This approach undermines Western solidarity and erodes the very principles on which the Western community was built.
Although Donald Trump has only been in office for a year, the scale of his actions and statements already gives reason to believe that the consequences of this presidency will be felt long after it ends. And there are still three years ahead that the United States and the whole world will have to live with in a reality shaped by Trump’s policies.
