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.

그거 듣고 발작하는 여자 있으면 그대로 거르고 내인생 살렸구나 고마워하면됨. 넌 잘 모르겠지만 진짜 많음 여친통해서 여친 친구들 이야기 듣는데 친구들 23는 낙태경력 다 있는듯 평소 얌전하든 행실바르든 그건 상관. 내 여자가 낙태 이력이 있는지 확인하는 방법 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ. 22살때 04년도에 친구커플 애지워야하는데 한달만 돈빌려달라해서 빌려줬는데 헌달후에 갚고서 그달말에 또 지워야한다고 빌려달라고 확인해보니 사실이더라 그후에도 그여친이랑 두번 더그럼 총4번이더라.

신일녀 똥

여친의 과거 낙태 경험을 알게된 블라인드남 jpg.. 저건 낙태를 혐오한다고 말을 하고있지만 실제 이유는 다른거란거지.. 28 191002 조회 51883 추천 1,225 댓글 575.. 낙태를 안하는 일녀랑 결혼하자 마우스 커서를 올리면 이미지 순서를 onoff 할 수 있습니다..

신미일주 부자

진짜 인생의 마지막여자,남자가될수도있는데 과거도중요하지 여기서 말하는 과거는 낙태경험이다 성관계가 중요한게 아니라 낙태가중요한거야.. 해석 남여 댓글부탁해 예전 여자친구 만날때도 낙태경험 있어도 그렇게 신경안썻는데 지금 만나는 여자친구도 연애때는 낙태경험 있어도 그러려니 했는데 막상 결혼얘기 나오니까 낙태한 전적이 거슬리네ㅠㅠ.. 이런거 보면 여자가 겪는 정신적이고 육체적인 피해가 너무 많아서 씁쓸하고 슬프다 쓰니 많이 힘들었겠다 답글 1시간 전.. 여자친구는 전 남자친구가 저에게 만나지말라고 연락할지도 모른다고 하는데, 도대체 왜 3년이나 지났다고 하면서 이따위 상황이 펼쳐지는지 이해도 안되고 그냥 뭔지 모르겠네요 걍 복잡합니다..

씩씩맨 키

난 여잔데 내가 남자였으면 낙태경험있는 여자 진짜 싫을거같음 여자혼자 잘못은아니지만 어쨋건 여자에게도 큰 책임이 있는거임. 22살때 04년도에 친구커플 애지워야하는데 한달만 돈빌려달라해서 빌려줬는데 헌달후에 갚고서 그달말에 또 지워야한다고 빌려달라고 확인해보니 사실이더라 그후에도 그여친이랑 두번 더그럼 총4번이더라. 나는 숨겼다가 발각되면 멘탈깨지고, 신뢰도깨지고 전같이.

여친의 과거 낙태 경험을 알게된 블라인드남 jpg. Kr › boarddownloaddbpianurimedia. 내 여자가 낙태 이력이 있는지 확인하는 방법 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ.

특히 우리나라의 임신 경험 여성의 낙태 경험률은 미혼인 경우가 81. 나는 숨겼다가 발각되면 멘탈깨지고, 신뢰도깨지고 전같이. 사귀는 도중에 낙태사실알면 관계지속가능. 긴 설득 끝에 여자친구는 작년 12월 말 낙태를 했습니다. 낙태 자체에 대해서 거부감이 있는 성격인거면 남자가 결혼할때도 똑같이 말했어야함.

Com › board › view여자친구가 낙태했었네요. 낙태 자체에 대해서 거부감이 있는 성격인거면 남자가 결혼할때도 똑같이 말했어야함, 저에게는 4년동안 사랑을 해온 남자친구가 있었습니다. Com › qna › dirs여자친구 낙태 경험 네이버 지식in. 서로 많이 사랑했지만, 결국 헤어졌고 이 남자친구와의 관계에서 낙태도 한번 경험했습니다.

192 이거 ㄹㅇ임ㅋㅋㅋ 그리고 남편한테 숨김ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 2024, 01 210607 조회 28725 추천 102 댓글 136 1 이미지 순서 on. 특히 우리나라의 임신 경험 여성의 낙태 경험률은 미혼인 경우가 81, Kr › boarddownloaddbpianurimedia. Com › qna › dirs여자친구 낙태 경험 네이버 지식in. 여자친구는 전 남자친구가 저에게 만나지말라고 연락할지도 모른다고 하는데, 도대체 왜 3년이나 지났다고 하면서 이따위 상황이 펼쳐지는지 이해도 안되고 그냥 뭔지 모르겠네요 걍 복잡합니다.

씨아트 사용법 Com › board › iamsolo대학때 낙태경험 한두번있는 여자들 나는 솔로 갤러리. 저건 낙태를 혐오한다고 말을 하고있지만 실제 이유는 다른거란거지. 일반 여자친구 낙태 후기 ㅇㅇ125. 낙태 경험이 있는 동료가 결혼한다네요 실시간 베스트 갤러리. 나이좀 있고 오래연애했으면 그런 성경험정도는 있는거지 그런것도 이해못해주면 그건 아직어린거고. 신박한요원이 야동

신지안 숙명여대 난 여잔데 내가 남자였으면 낙태경험있는 여자 진짜 싫을거같음 여자혼자 잘못은아니지만 어쨋건 여자에게도 큰 책임이 있는거임. 싫음 무책임한거잖음 피임안하고 상대방에 배려 없어보임 dc app. 사귀는 도중에 낙태사실알면 관계지속가능. 피임 제대로 안한거 그리고 명백한 살인아님. 해석 남여 댓글부탁해 예전 여자친구 만날때도 낙태경험 있어도 그렇게 신경안썻는데 지금 만나는 여자친구도 연애때는 낙태경험 있어도 그러려니 했는데 막상 결혼얘기 나오니까 낙태한 전적이 거슬리네ㅠㅠ. 신음소리 프롬프트

싸우는게 지칠때 저건 낙태를 혐오한다고 말을 하고있지만 실제 이유는 다른거란거지. 낙태 자체에 대해서 거부감이 있는 성격인거면 남자가 결혼할때도 똑같이 말했어야함. 여친의 과거 낙태 경험을 알게된 블라인드남 jpg. 첫 섹스할때 콘돔끼지말라했던것도 생각나고. 곧 결혼할건데 진정한 사랑은 과거까지도 사랑하는 것이라는 말이 있습니다. 신태일 vs 말왕

아마츠카 아무 자막 싫음 무책임한거잖음 피임안하고 상대방에 배려 없어보임 dc app. 그거 듣고 발작하는 여자 있으면 그대로 거르고 내인생 살렸구나 고마워하면됨. 현대모비스 꽁 궁금한데, 여자가 무슨 잘못이 있는거지. 누구나 이쁘고 능력있는 여자,잘생기고 능력있는 남자랑 연애하고 결혼하고 싶어도 현실은 아니고 내가 사랑해서 결혼생각까지 갔으면 그 사람 자체가 좋았던거니까 낙태했다하면 고민은 돼도 결혼 생각까지 했었을 정도로 사랑한다면 난 상관없을듯. 대답을 하더라도 형식적인 대답들 있잖아요.

신태일 미성년자 영상 Com › talk › 374613395여친의 낙태경험 내가 과민반응인가. 너한테 말하면 소문날까봐 여자혼자 수술했을수도 있는건데. 실제로 낙태를 한 후에도 부모님을 소개하는 등 결혼 준비에 들어갔고, 헤어진 것은 임신 때문이 아닌 전 여친의 계속되는 거짓말 때문이었다고 보도했다. 낙태를 안하는 일녀랑 결혼하자 마우스 커서를 올리면 이미지 순서를 onoff 할 수 있습니다. 피임 제대로 안한거 그리고 명백한 살인아님.

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.