Sounds like John Bolton is having some influence. Of course all four of those nations do not respect the individual liberties and violate the human rights of their citizens, but to lump all four as "forces for instability" is interesting. Two rogue nations and their enablers.
This seems quite unlike the isolationism that some Trump supporters believe the President represents. Is America wary of these nations, or is it our policy to contain or roll back their influence? The first is isolationism. The second, containment, is straight from the pre-Reagan Cold War, and the final - rolling back of their influence - is neoconservatism.
Let's not fail to see the influence the Trumpian form of engagement has wrought: North Korea is prepared to finally talk about fundamental issues. Saudia Arabia is under new leadership and has hinted that indeed Israel may have the right to exist. ISIS has been driven from Iraq, and the three great nations that are and have always represented "forces for stability" for Western civilization - Britain, America and France - teamed up to deliver a military blow to Russia's sadistic lickspittle.
We live in interesting times. Trump is beseiged at home, hated by an opposition party who literally seek his demise, and facing a corrupt senior law enforcement bureaucracy willing to play its role in a silent coup. But he still has the ability to shape foreign policy and project American power, and is apparently willing to do so by employing a card that hasn't been played in a while - unpredictability.