13 지방선거에 투표를 하기 위해 참석했을 당시 파란 모자를 쓰고 있었단 이유로 일부 야당 지지자로부터 비난을 받았다.

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.

13 지방선거를 맞아 8일인 오늘 서울 강남구 압구정동주민센터에 마련된 사전투표소를 찾아. 사진ytn스타 방송인 유재석이 미래를 위해 투표를 해야한다고 강조했다. 방송인 유재석이 사전투표장에서 파란색 모자를 썼다는 이유로 북으로 가라는 글을 올렸다 지운 민경욱 자유한국당인천 연수구을 의원의 사전투표. Com › newsview › 1vs5c1fwop유재석 지방선거에 파란옷, 좌편향 강용석가세연 좌파논란까지 키.

강용석 등이 진행하고 있는 유튜브 채널 가로세로연구소가세연가 유재석과 김태호pd에 대한 의혹을 주장했다.. 유재석 투표할 때 의상 어떻게 생각하시나요.. 13 지방선거 당시 투표장에 파란색 모자와 신발, 청바지를 입고 더불어민주당을 노골적으로 지지했다고 주장했다..

Com › Watch파란옷 입고 투표장에 나타난 유재석.

민경욱 유재석 사진연합뉴스, 페이스북 민경욱 자유한국당 의원이 국민 Mc 유재석을 저격했다 구설수에 올랐다.

파란색 좋아하는 내가 공인이 아니라서 다. 사전투표 마친 유재석, 수수한 옷차림으로 등장 눈길 twig. 2018년 지방선거 당시 이 패션으로 투표소 나왔다가 사진 찍혀서그 찌라시 전문 정치 유튜브 채널에게특정 정당을 지지한다는 사실을 함의하는 것이 아니냐 라고 저격당함. 파란 모자 썼다고 유재석 북으로 비난한 민경욱 투표 복장, 정치 유재석 투표할 때 의상 어떻게 생각하시나요. Kr › news › newsview파란 모자 썼다고 유재석 북으로 비난한 민경욱 투표 복장.

래퍼 데프콘의 ‘반반 콘셉트’ 인증샷은 수 년이 지났지만 선거때마다 화자되고 있다. 13 선거일에 유재석이가 파란 모자를 쓰고 투표장에 나온 sns 인증샷 사진을 보고, 자유한국당 민경욱 의원은 파란 모자를 쓴 채 투표를 했다는, 다소 프리한 복장으로 투표장에 가셨군요 ㅎㅎㅎ 유재석을 비롯하여 여러 연예인들이 투표하는 인증샷을 올리는데요. 민 의원은 지난 13일 지방선거 투표.

Kr › News › Newsview파란 모자 썼다고 유재석 북으로 비난한 민경욱 투표 복장.

유재석, 얼굴보다 마음이 잘생긴 반장 선거에 압도적 지지로 당선. 유재석 패션 역대급 논란jpg 유머움짤이슈. 강용석 등이 진행하고 있는 유튜브 채널 가로세로연구소가세연가 유재석과 김태호pd에 대한 의혹을 주장했다.

Com › segyecom › 223836611921파란옷 입은 유재석, 좌편향&mldr. 11 1340 김의성 조권은 대놓고 지지선언한거같고 유재석 패션은 다른 사람이었으면 깜빡했다고 볼수있는 수준이긴한데 유재석이 그걸 모를사람이 아니라 지지선언한걸로 봐도 될거같음 5 카고아이 2020. 포토 유재석 진정성 있는 자세로 투표 합니다. Mbc 예능프로그램 무한도전의 차세대 리더를 뽑는 선택 2014 투표는 이미 전국 11개 투. 김태호 pd에 대해서는 이른바 뒷돈 의혹을 주장했다. 방송인 유재석이 사전투표장에서 파란색 모자를 썼다는 이유로 북으로 가라는 글을 올렸다 지운 민경욱 자유한국당인천 연수구을 의원의 사전투표.

사진출처 온라인 커뮤니티 이승길 기자 winnings@mydaily. Com › watch파란옷 입고 투표장에 나타난 유재석. 13 선거일에 유재석이가 파란 모자를 쓰고 투표장에 나온 sns 인증샷 사진을 보고, 자유한국당 민경욱 의원은 파란 모자를 쓴 채 투표를 했다는 이유로 유재석 씨를 비난하는 게시글을 자신의 페이스북에 공유했다.

강용석 등이 진행하고 있는 유튜브 채널 가로세로연구소가세연가 유재석과 김태호pd에 대한 의혹을 주장했다. 가로세로연구소는 국민 mc 유재석 씨가 지난해 6월 지방선거 때 좌 편향적인. 정치색 표현한거랑 아무 관련 없는걸까요, 래퍼 데프콘의 ‘반반 콘셉트’ 인증샷은 수 년이 지났지만 선거때마다 화자되고 있다.

Png 예능의 기본을 지키겠습니다 유재석 리더 당선인의 선거 슬로건 무한도전 차세대.

정치 유재석 투표할 때 의상 어떻게 생각하시나요, 가세연은 19일 유재석 첫 단독 기자회견 이유라는 제목의 방송을 진행해 유재석과 김태호pd에게 각각 주가조작, 비자금 의혹을 제기했다. 못 지킬 땐 따끔하게 혼날 준비가 돼있는, 네, 방송인 유재석의 투표 패션에 누리꾼들의 시선이 쏠렸다.

13 선거일에 유재석이가 파란 모자를 쓰고 투표장에 나온 Sns 인증샷 사진을 보고, 자유한국당 민경욱 의원은 파란 모자를 쓴 채 투표를 했다는 이유로 유재석 씨를 비난하는 게시글을 자신의 페이스북에 공유했다.

의도한거 아니냐고 기사도 뜸ㅋㅋㅋ 운영참여 게시중단요청 이용약관 개인정보처리방침 청소년보호정책 불법촬영물등 신고 광고제휴 메일문의 뽐뿌채용 faq 다크모드. 국민mc 유재석이 소중한 한표를 행사했다. Com › segyecom › 223836611921파란옷 입은 유재석, 좌편향&mldr. 사진ytn스타 방송인 유재석이 미래를 위해 투표를 해야한다고 강조했다. 방송인 유재석의 투표 패션에 누리꾼들의 시선이 쏠렸다. 제18대 대통령선거 투표에 참여한 개그맨 유재석.

의도한거 아니냐고 기사도 뜸ㅋㅋㅋ 운영참여 게시중단요청 이용약관 개인정보처리방침 청소년보호정책 불법촬영물등 신고 광고제휴 메일문의 뽐뿌채용 faq 다크모드. 바쁜 스케줄 속에서도 소중한 한표를 행사하고자 사전투표를 통해 일찌감치 투표에 임한 것. 유튜브 채널 가로세로연구소이하 가세연이 방송인 유재석을 두고 이른바 무한도전 성추문 연예인은 아니라고 밝히면서도 그가 좌편향 연예인이며, 포토 유재석 진정성 있는 자세로 투표 합니다 22일 서울 중구 동대문디자인플라자ddp에서 mbc 예능 무한도전의 차세대 리더를 선출하는 선거가 실시됐다, 정치 유재석 투표할 때 의상 어떻게 생각하시나요.

ahoo 야동 다소 프리한 복장으로 투표장에 가셨군요 ㅎㅎㅎ 유재석을 비롯하여 여러 연예인들이 투표하는 인증샷을 올리는데요. 유재석은 4월 11일 오전 서울 강남구 압구정동 한 투표소에서 4. 사진ytn스타 방송인 유재석이 미래를 위해 투표를 해야한다고 강조했다. 민 의원은 지난 13일 지방선거 투표. 포토 유재석 진정성 있는 자세로 투표 합니다 22일 서울 중구 동대문디자인플라자ddp에서 mbc 예능 무한도전의 차세대 리더를 선출하는 선거가 실시됐다. ahoo._.08 ライブ

@siyeon_big 13 지방선거를 맞아 8일인 오늘 서울 강남구 압구정동주민센터에 마련된 사전투표소를 찾아. 제7회 전국동시지방선거 및 국회의원 재보궐 선거 투표일 sns 투표 인증샷과 투표 독려가 봇물처럼 이어진 가운데 자유한국당 소속 민경욱 의원이. 2018년 지방선거 당시 이 패션으로 투표소 나왔다가 사진 찍혀서그 찌라시 전문 정치 유튜브 채널에게특정 정당을 지지한다는 사실을 함의하는 것이 아니냐 라고 저격당함. Com › newsview › 20191220503103유재석 파란옷 입어 좌편향 가세연 의혹 제기에 누리꾼 ‘황당’. 가세연은 19일 유재석 첫 단독 기자회견 이유라는 제목의 방송을 진행해 유재석과 김태호pd에게 각각 주가조작, 비자금 의혹을 제기했다. 6살여아장난감

6ar6ie 북으로 가길 바라 민경욱, 유재석 파란 모자에 색깔론 저격. 가로세로연구소는 국민 mc 유재석 씨가 지난해 6월 지방선거 때 좌 편향적인. 유재석은 4월 11일 오전 서울 강남구 압구정동 한 투표소에서 4. 하지만 이는 유재석 진행의 문제라기보다는 제작진의 무능 탓이 크다. 연예인들도 많은 인증샷을 남겼는데유재석씨 패션이 화제네요ㅎㅎ 4. afreecatv downloader

65g zip 정치 유재석 투표할 때 의상 어떻게 생각하시나요. 이날 유재석은 상하의를 맞춰 입은 트레이닝룩을 선보이며 투표 패션 종결자로 떠올랐다. 바쁜 스케줄 속에서도 유재석은 자신의 소중한 한 표를 행사했다. 해당 글은 자유한국당의 민경욱 의원이 sns에 리트윗하며 논란이 되었습니다 그 내용을 리트윗 한 행동 자체가 그 내용에 공감한 동의가 있지 않았을까요. 사진ytn스타 방송인 유재석이 미래를 위해 투표를 해야한다고 강조했다.

ahoo 現在 유재석은 4월 11일 오전 서울 강남구 압구정동 한 투표소에서 4. 유재석이 입은 네이비톤 트레이닝복은 해외 유명. 더불어민주당을 상징하는 파란색 모자를 썼기에 특정 정당. 민 의원은 지난 13일 지방선거 투표. 민경욱 유재석 사진연합뉴스, 페이스북 민경욱 자유한국당 의원이 국민 mc 유재석을 저격했다 구설수에 올랐다.

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.