Will Human Rights Survive a Trumpian World?

Authoritarian Advances Threaten Rules-Based Order

The global human rights system is in peril. Under relentless pressure from US President Donald Trump, and persistently undermined by China and Russia, the rules-based international order is being crushed, threatening to take with it the architecture human rights defenders have come to rely on to advance norms and protect freedoms. To defy this trend, governments that still value human rights, alongside social movements, civil society, and international institutions, need to form a strategic alliance to push back.

To be fair, the downward spiral predated Trump’s reelection. The democratic wave that began over 50 years ago has given way to what scholars term a “democratic recession.” Democracy is now back to 1985 levels according to some metrics, with 72 percent of the world’s population now living under autocracy. Russia and China are less free today than 20 years ago. And so is the United States.

Of course, democracy is not a panacea for human rights violations; the US and other longtime democracies have their own histories of colonial crimes, racism, abusive justice systems, and wartime atrocities. More recently, authoritarian leaders have exploited public mistrust and anger to win elections and then dismantled the very institutions that brought them to power. Democratic institutions are crucial to represent the will of the people and keep power in check. It’s no surprise that whenever democracy is undermined, rights are too, as evident in recent years in India, Türkiye, the Philippines, El Salvador, and Hungary.

In this context, 2025 may be seen as a tipping point. In just 12 months, the Trump administration has carried out a broad assault on key pillars of US democracy and the global rules-based order, which the US, despite inconsistencies, was, with other states, instrumental in helping to establish.

In short order, Trump’s second-term administration has undermined trust in the sanctity of elections, reduced government accountability, gutted food assistance and healthcare subsidies, attacked judicial independence, defied court orders, rolled back women’s rights, obstructed access to abortion care, undermined remedies for racial harm, terminated programs mandating accessibility for people with disabilities, punished free speech, stripped protections from trans and intersex people, eroded privacy, and used government power to intimidate political opponents, the media, law firms, universities, civil society, and even comedians.

Claiming a risk of “civilizational erasure” in Europe and leaning on racist tropes to cast entire populations as unwelcome in the US, the Trump administration has embraced policies and rhetoric that align with white nationalist ideology. Immigrants and asylum seekers have been subjected to inhumane conditions and degrading treatment; 32 died in US Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody in 2025, and as of mid-January 2026, an additional 4 have died. Masked immigration enforcement agents have targeted people of color, using excessive force, terrorizing communities, wrongfully arresting scores of citizens, and, most recently, unjustifiably killing two people in Minneapolis, whose deaths Human Rights Watch has documented.

The US president of course has the authority to tighten US borders and enforce stricter immigration policies. The administration is not, however, entitled to deny legal process to asylum seekers, mistreat undocumented migrants, or unlawfully discriminate. In a well-functioning democracy, no electoral mandate should supersede domestic legislation, constitutional protections, or international human rights law. Trump’s team has repeatedly bypassed these guardrails.

The violations have not stopped at the border. The Trump administration used a 1798 law to send hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to an infamous prison in El Salvador, where they were tortured and sexually abused. Its blatantly unlawful strikes on boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific extrajudicially killed more than 120 people whom Trump claims were drug traffickers.

After the US attacked Venezuela and apprehended its president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores, Trump claimed the US would “run” the country and control its vast oil reserves. Despite paying lip service to human rights concerns under Maduro at the United Nations, Trump has worked with the same repressive apparatus to further US interests. Many Western allies have chosen to stay silent about these lawless moves, perhaps fearing erratic tariffs and blowback to their alliances.

Trump’s foreign policy has upended the foundations of the rules-based order that seeks to advance democracy and human rights, even if imperfectly.

Trump has boasted that he doesn’t “need international law” as a constraint, only his “own morality.” His administration has politicized the US State Department’s annual human rights report, stepped away from the global prohibition on antipersonnel landmines, voiced support for rewriting international rules on asylum, and skipped the UN’s Universal Periodic Review of the US’ human rights record.

His administration withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council and the World Health Organization and plans to quit 66 international organizations and programs that it describes as part of an “outdated model of multilateralism,” including key forums for climate negotiations. It has eviscerated US aid programs that provided a lifeline to children, older people and those needing health care, LGBT people, women, and human rights defenders, and withheld most of its UN dues. 

Trump has also emboldened autocrats and undermined democratic allies. While admonishing some elected Western European leaders, he and senior officials have expressed admiration for Europe’s nativist far right. He has favored autocrats such as Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Türkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, while continuing decades of US support to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

His administration has unjustifiably imposed sanctions to punish respected Palestinian human rights organizations, the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) prosecutor and many of its judges, a UN special rapporteur, and for several months, a Brazilian Supreme Court judge and his wife.

The institutional response in the US to Trump’s power grabs has been shockingly muted. Much of Congress, controlled by his own party, has not challenged his supercharged expansion of executive power. The leaders of the US’ most powerful technology companies have made significant donations and sought to placate the president. Some big law firms and prestigious universities have made deals rather than assert their independence, and some media organizations seem afraid to attract the president’s ire.

Has the US switched sides on the human rights playing field? While US engagement with human rights institutions has always been selective, China and Russia have long pursued an illiberal agenda. They stand much to gain from a US government that now expresses open hostility to universal rights. China and Russia remain strategic rivals of the US, but all three countries are now led by leaders who share open disdain for norms and institutions that could constrain their power.

Together, they wield considerable economic, military, and diplomatic power. If they were to consistently act as allies of convenience to erode global rules, they could threaten the entire system. Already, a loose international network of countries such as North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Myanmar, Cuba, and Belarus work in concert with Russia and China. These leaders share very little ideologically but align in undermining human rights and promoting a regressive international agenda. In word and in practice, the US government is now helping them in this endeavor.

The US’ weakening of multilateral institutions also dealt a serious blow to global efforts to prevent or stop grave international crimes. The “never again” movement, born from the horrors of the Holocaust and reignited by the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides, spurred the UN General Assembly to embrace the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in 2005. Meant to guide international intervention to prevent and stop atrocities in tandem with efforts to prosecute and punish serious crimes, R2P made a real difference in places like the Central African Republic and Kenya.

Today, R2P is rarely invoked and the ICC is under siege. In addition to Trump’s far-reaching sanctions, in December 2025 a Moscow court sentenced the ICC prosecutor and eight of its judges to prison terms in absentia. Moreover, despite being ICC fugitives, in 2025, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin was welcomed by Donald Trump in Alaska, and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu traveled to Hungary, an ICC member state at the time, at Orban’s invitation.

Twenty years ago, the US government and civil society were instrumental in galvanizing a response to mass atrocities in Darfur. Sudan is burning again, but this time under Trump, with relative impunity. Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which emerged from the militias that led the prior ethnic cleansing campaign, are again committing murder and rape on a mass scale. A growing body of evidence indicates that the UAE, a longtime US ally that recently made multi-billion-dollar deals with Trump, is providing the RSF with military support.

In the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Israeli armed forces have committed acts of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, killing over 70,000 people since the October 2023 Hamas-led attacks on Israel and displacing the vast majority of Gaza’s population. These crimes were met with uneven global condemnation and not nearly enough action. Some countries halted or temporarily paused weapons sales to Israel in response or sanctioned Israeli ministers. Trump, however, continued a long-standing US policy of almost unconditional support to Israel, even as the International Court of Justice is weighing allegations of genocide and has issued binding orders under the Genocide Convention to protect Palestinians’ rights.

Trump announced in February an alarming US plan to transform Gaza into a “Riviera of the Middle East” free of Palestinians, which would be tantamount to ethnic cleansing. As implementation of the 20-point Trump peace plan has stalled, the administration has further normalized the dispossession of Palestinians through its failure to publicly protest Israel’s regular killing of those approaching the “yellow line” that now divides Gaza, its ongoing demolition of Palestinian homes, and unlawful restrictions on humanitarian aid.

In Ukraine, Trump’s peace efforts have consistently downplayed Russia’s responsibility for serious violations. These include indiscriminate bombing, coercing Ukrainians in occupied areas to serve in the Russian military, systematic torture of Ukrainian prisoners of war, the abduction and deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia, and the use of quadcopter drones to hunt and kill civilians. Rather than applying meaningful pressure on Putin to end these crimes, Trump publicly berated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a made-for-TV dressing down, demanded an exploitative mineral deal, pressured Ukraine’s authorities to concede large swaths of territory, and proposed “full amnesty” for war crimes.

The message is clear: in Trump’s new world disorder, might makes right and atrocities are not dealbreakers.

보갤에 키183 권상우리즈면 ㅁㅌㅊ임. Com › view › 20250105n08570권상우 화면발 잘 안 받아, 실물이 더 커 보인다고&mldr. 168cm부터 175cm까지 모두 자신들의 키와 차이가 없다 말하는 눈대중 이란건 애초에 객관성 제로. 29 224506 삭제 u갤러2211.

1867978 Hentai

2026년 민생지원금 디시

1cm, 몸무게 83kg, 혈액형 o형.. 5다 6이다라고 말하는 사람들이 있는데 키는 182..

02.crazy.fans

권상우 실제 키는 175cm 정도라고 말하는 네티즌들. 권상우 프로필 안녕하세요 오늘은 배우 권상우 프로필에 대해 간단하게 살펴보는 시간을 갖도록 하겠습니다. Com › view › 20250105n08570권상우 화면발 잘 안 받아, 실물이 더 커 보인다고&mldr. 권상우 실제 키는 175cm 정도라고 말하는 네티즌들. 하성이 키가 178이지만 그건 착화 신장이고 잘 알려진 상태로는 175라고 하던데 권상우가 김하성보다 조금 작아보인다 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 근데 프로필 키는 183.

07하늘 사진

이상하게 사람들은 연예인 키 말할때 대부분 되게 낮춰보는게 있는거 같아나랑 비슷한 키의 사람이 내옆에 있으면 대부분 사람들은 그사람의 키가 나보다 작다고 느낌실제로 제 3자가 볼때는 다른사람이 더 크게 보이는데도. 2007년에 플레디스 엔터테인먼트 에서 솔로 가수로 데뷔했으며, 2009년에. 뉴저지 손태영 채널에는 일본 최고의 현지인 찐맛집에 간 손태영 도쿄 vlog 2편 1박 100만원 호텔, 돈키호테 최애템이라는 제. 권상우 프로필 정보 권상우 프로필 정보부터 살펴보면 1976년 8월 5일생으로 올해 나이는 47세입니다.

권상우의 숱많은 머리에 대한 화제가 나온 가운데 권상우는 아예 짧게 자르든지, 아예 기르든지 해야 편하다라고 말했다. Com › board › view권상우 키 크다니깐 ufc 갤러리. 2008년 배우 권상우, 손태영이 부부의 연을 맺었는데요. 키는 180cm를 넘긴 것으로 알려졌고, 일부 매체와 커뮤니티에서는 182cm까지 성장했다는 이야기도 나왔습니다.

이는 실제로 우리나라 1970년대까지도 많이 있었던 풍습이다.. 남자 멸치들이 난 저렇게 너무 근육질인건 싫고 적당히 운동해서 권상우 정도까지만 만들려고라는 개소리를 하게 만드는 몸, 29세 운동남입니다 예쁜 남자..

뉴저지 손태영’에는 ‘이번엔 진짜 다투는 손태영♥권상우 부부 +룩희리호 얼굴공개’라는 제목의 영상이 공개됐다. 배우자 손태영은 결혼 후 육아에 전념하며 가정을 돌보고 있다, 이정진,권상우 둘다 프로필은 183인데 둘이 보니 이정진이 키가 더커서 권상우가 속인거같은데 어차피 잘생겨서 상관은없지만. 권상우 결혼권상우는 배우 손태영과 2008년도에 결혼하여 슬하에 아들과 딸이 한명씩 있습니다, 2008년 배우 권상우, 손태영이 부부의 연을 맺었는데요. 권상우의 숱많은 머리에 대한 화제가 나온 가운데 권상우는 아예 짧게 자르든지, 아예 기르든지 해야 편하다라고 말했다.

검색에 많이 나오는 태양 키 158 에서 158센티도 크게 잡은걸수 있고 실제로는 150초반도 가능. 검색에 많이 나오는 태양 키 158 에서 158센티도 크게 잡은걸수 있고 실제로는 150초반도 가능, 달리dall는 인공지능을 활용한 이미지 생성 기술로, 다양한 창작 활동에 활용될 수 있는 혁신적인 도구입니다. 이정진,권상우 둘다 프로필은 183인데 둘이 보니 이정진이 키가 더커서 권상우가 속인거같은데 어차피 잘생겨서 상관은없지만. 생년월일은 1976년 5월 5일로 2025년 나이는 50세입니다.

30대 여자 소개팅 디시 1cm이다라고 자신의 실제 키를 밝혔다. 이는 실제로 우리나라 1970년대까지도 많이 있었던 풍습이다. 비한 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ11년 전 shinee 민호 헐 작을줄 알았는데11년 전 레몬티청년 어우 크시네11년 전 b. Com › view › 20250105n08570권상우 화면발 잘 안 받아, 실물이 더 커 보인다고&mldr. 사람들은 더 작게 본다고 속상해 했다. 1on5

30대 미혼율 디시 1cm, 몸무게 83kg, 혈액형 o형. 뉴저지 손태영 채널에는 일본 최고의 현지인 찐맛집에 간 손태영 도쿄 vlog 2편 1박 100만원 호텔, 돈키호테 최애템이라는 제. 체격도 말라보이고 눈여 김수현누나도 엄청 마르고 키도 안크고. 권상우 봤는데 생각보다 키가 안컸음 기타 국내 드라마 갤러리. 다만 맥락상 구갑조 권상우 일행은 실제로는 학생이 아니었고 학생모 만 착용한 학생 을 사칭한 사람들이었다. 1852875 fc

3241287 Com › mgallery › board남자연예인 실제 키 모음. 고향은 대전광역시 중구 출생이고 키 183cm, 몸무게 72kg, 혈액형 o형이라고 하네요. 권상우 봤는데 생각보다 키가 안컸음 기타 국내 드라마 갤러리. 뉴저지 손태영’에는 ‘이번엔 진짜 다투는 손태영♥권상우 부부 +룩희리호 얼굴공개’라는 제목의 영상이 공개됐다. 아빠 권상우 182cm와 거의 같은 체격입니다. 04년생 야동

169._.ym av 뉴저지 손태영’에는 ‘이번엔 진짜 다투는 손태영♥권상우 부부 +룩희리호 얼굴공개’라는 제목의 영상이 공개됐다. 고향은 대전광역시 중구 출생이고 키 183cm, 몸무게 72kg, 혈액형 o형이라고 하네요. 권상우 180 의외로 키큼 소지섭 180 수영하는 프로에서 잼 다니엘헤니 184 현빈 183 윤상현 177 이훈 173 수영하는 프로에서 잼 신정환 178 대가리 크고 왜소해서 작아보이는데 의외로 큼 정준하 185 이기우 193 개리 169 임원희 172 장동민 170 이승광 175 이종혁 182 이정진 183. 권상우가 옷입은기준 이유진보다 운티 더나는듯 보디빌딩. 2008년 배우 권상우, 손태영이 부부의 연을 맺었는데요.

0pornhub 권상우 실제 키는 175cm 정도라고 말하는 네티즌. 권상우가 옷입은기준 이유진보다 운티 더나는듯 보디빌딩. 2008년 배우 권상우, 손태영이 부부의 연을 맺었는데요. 김희철, 유재석, 원빈, 김수현, 권상우, 지석진 176 규현, 이정재 177 이휘재, 민경훈, 노홍철 178 변기유천 179 정일우 180 유노윤호. 고향은 대전광역시 중구 출생이고 키 183cm, 몸무게 72kg, 혈액형 o형이라고 하네요.

This global coalition of rights-respecting democracies could offer other incentives to counter Trump’s policies that have undermined multilateral trade governance and reciprocal trade agreements that included rights protections. Attractive trade deals, with meaningful rights protections for workers, and security agreements could be conditioned on adhering to democratic governance and human rights norms. Democracy already comes with benefits. While autocracies have generally fostered conflict, economic stagnation, or kleptocracy, as evidenced in multiple academic studies, including the work of the Nobel Prize-winning economist Daron Acemoglu, democratic institutions reliably yield economic growth. 

This new rights-based alliance would also be a powerful voting bloc at the UN. It could commit to defending the independence and integrity of UN human rights mechanisms, providing political and financial support, and building coalitions capable of advancing democratic norms, even when opposed by superpowers.

Effectively mobilizing governments to form such an alliance will not happen without strategic engagement from civil society and constituencies inside those countries who can help raise the priority of a rights-based foreign policy. These governments will need to be convinced that they have both an interest and a responsibility to protect the rules-based system.

Projects of this nature are bubbling up. Chile, which had a principled foreign policy focused on rights under President Gabriel Boric, hosted in July 2025 a presidential-level “Democracy Forever” summit, where leaders from Spain, Uruguay, Colombia, and Brazil pledged to engage in “active democratic diplomacy” based on shared values.

The Hague Group, led by Malaysia, South Africa, and Colombia, formed in January 2025 in “defense of international law” and in solidarity with Palestinians. Over 70 countries from all regions signed a joint statement defending multilateralism at the UN. Earlier, in 2017, former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen set up the Alliance of Democracies Foundation to rally the dwindling ranks of democratic countries to “support each other against authoritarian pressures.”

Whatever its precise contours, an alliance of rights-respecting democracies would offer a hopeful counterpoint to the authoritarian trope of China’s and Russia’s leaders standing alongside North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, observing military hardware in a parade in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in September. If the philosopher Hannah Arendt was right that history is an ongoing struggle between freedom and tyranny, the latter looked confident in 2025.

Yet, even in the worst of times, the idea of freedom and human rights is enduring. People power remains an engine for change. In the US, “No Kings” marches have drawn millions, protesters in Chicago, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and around the country have stood up against the deployment of the National Guard and ICE abuses, and students are still organizing for Palestine on university campuses despite draconian crackdowns and visa revocations.

Buoyed by popular resistance, South Korean parliamentarians impeached their president to prevent him from grabbing power through martial law. Grassroots aid efforts by Sudan’s emergency response rooms, Hong Kong’s fire relief, Sri Lanka’s cyclone relief community kitchens, and Ukrainian mutual aid and solidarity collectives represent the best of this trend.

In 2025, Gen Z protests against corruption, inadequate public services, and poor governance in Nepal, Indonesia, and Morocco brought to the forefront the need for governments to listen to their youth and tackle corruption and inequality. But as the difficulties of restoring rights in Bangladesh after years under an authoritarian government illustrates, gains won through public mobilization can easily be lost unless democratic participation and free expression remain unassailable.