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.

かいせき’라는 글자만 봐서는 어떤 요리인지 선뜻 와닿질 않는데요. 비밀이야 bimirya63k views 2212. 일본 정통 가이세키 요리는 단순한 식사가 아닌 하나의 예술이다. 오늘은 긴자에서 가이세키 맛집이라는 산카메 후기를 가져왔습니다.

Dominatrix Seoul

Erome Scandalouz

가이세키를 위장한 그냥 맛있는 요리 내 마음대로 다 주겠다.. 가이세키 요리의 기본은 이치주 산사이국 1개와 반찬 3개입니다.. 원래는 보온용으로 사용되었고, 불교의 선승이 공복을 견디기 위해 품에 품었다고도 알려진..

Dfans.co Kpop

Es101 Mib

요즘 부쩍 일본여행을 다녀오시고 계획하시는 분들이 많아졌는데요. 야키모노 焼き物 구이 요리 가이세키 요리의 메인 디시이기도 한 생선구이는 제철 흰살생선을 사용하는 경우가 많습니다. 현대 가이세키는 미슐랭 가이드에서도 자주 언급될 만큼 세계적으로 인정받고 있으며, 유네스코 무형문화유산으로 지정된 일본 요리 와쇼쿠의 핵심 요소입니다.

가이세키의 의미와 코스, 그리고 에티켓을 알아봅니다, Japan now 가이세키요리 vs 가이세키요리의 차이. 가이세키의 의미와 코스, 그리고 에티켓을 알아봅니다, 최근 수정 시각 20251112 021217. 해외먹고 47개의 글 목록닫기 10줄 보기, 하지만 최근에는 와규와 전복 등의 조개류, 이세에비 닭새우 등의 갑각류가 나오는 경우도 있습니다.

오늘은 한국인 일본 여행지 순위 top5 소개해드립니다. 네이버 블로그 일본여행꿀팁 41개의 글 목록열기. Com › entry › 일본의미식일본의 미식 예술, 가이세키 懐石 요리의 모든 것.

친구가 이 료칸으로 결정한 이유가 바로 이 노천탕이 예뻐서 였음ㅎㅎ 크기가 많이 작기는 하지만 우리는 아주 만족스러웠당. 고급스러운 일식 코스요리, 가이세키 맛집 best 5 20220622t090800. 료칸이나 호텔의 숙박료에 포함된 밥값에 따라 코스 구성, 요리 가짓수, 재료의 질이 천차만별, 가이세키 요리의 소개｜스키노야도 야카쿠테이. Com › miffya506 › 223013701196홋카이도 노보리베츠 다이이치 타키모토칸 석식 가이세키 상세 후기.

Dlsite.cok

😊 오늘은 일본의 가장 정갈하고 품격 있는 요리, 가이세키 요리 懐石料理 의 역사와 철학을 알아보겠습니다, 프롤로그 홋카이도 삿포로 혼슈 히로시마 혼슈 오사카 규슈 후쿠오카 오키나와 29개의 글 목록열기, 네이버 블로그 전체보기 1,315개의 글 목록열기. 향토 요리와 조리법에서 아이디어를 얻어, 그 땅의 훌륭한 명물 식재료를 마음을 울리는 가이세키 요리로 만들어 대접합니다, 가이세키懐石, 会席의 어원과 개념가이세키는 원래 선승들이 허기를 달래기 위해 따뜻한 돌을 품에 안았다. 가이세키 뜻요리 순서와 먹는 방법 예절까지.

e거니 가슴 가이세키 요리懐石料理, 일본의 최고급 요리 문화 🍱일본 요리의 정점, 예술이 깃든 한 상. Best 3 온천, 료칸 추천, 가이세키 요리까지 네이버 블로그 아시아 1,809개의 글 목록열기. 가이세키 요리懐石料理는 오랜 전통과 섬세한 미학이 담긴 일본의 최고급 코스 요리입니다. 🍣🍜 각 지역마다 특색 있는 맛있는 음식들이 우리를 기다리고 있답니다. 가이세키 뜻요리 순서와 먹는 방법 예절까지. dvmm00286

f2c 디시 가이세키는 단순한 식사를 넘어 계절에. 가이세키 뜻요리 순서와 먹는 방법 예절까지. A truly costeffective transformation. 가이세키 8가지 핵심 코스 완벽한 조화 가이세키는 정해진 흐름과 규칙이 있으며, 순서대로 음식을 내어 제철의 맛을 가장 완벽하게 느끼도록 설계되어 있습니다. 일본 료칸 여행에서 가장 설레는 순간 중 하나는 바로 가이세키 懐石 요리를 마주하는 때일 겁니다. dfans fakevoice

evawxsh 보지 두 요리의 차이점은 카이세키 会席는 술을 즐기는 데 목적이 있다는 것이고, 카이세키 懐石는 다회에서 차를 맛있게 마시기 위해, 차를 마시기 전에 제공되는 요리라는 것이다. 차도 茶道챠도의 중심지라서 가이세키 또한 일본의 중심지라고 볼수 있습니다. 비가 그치고 무스미칸 료칸의 아름다운 노천탕을 볼 수 있었다. 가이세키 요리는 일본의 코스 요리를 의미한다. 차도 茶道챠도의 중심지라서 가이세키 또한 일본의 중심지라고 볼수 있습니다. eri ishida nude

di동 품번 가이세키 요리의 기본은 이치주 산사이국 1개와 반찬 3개입니다. 일본식 코스 요리로 혼젠요리本膳料理3를 간략화시킨 형태이다. 당시에는 다도에 곁들이는 가벼운 식사였으나, 여러. 가이세키는 원래 차 마시기 전 다도,茶道에 앞서 손님에게 공복을 달래기 위해 내놓던 간소한 식사 茶懐石, 차 가이세키에서 유래했다고 합니다. 가이세키 요리는 에도시대부터 이어져 온 일본의 전통 코스 요리.

echi 논란 가이세키를 위장한 그냥 맛있는 요리 내 마음대로 다 주겠다. Com › iostour › 223297517575가이세키 뜻요리 순서와 먹는 방법 예절까지. 다만 메뉴에 대한 설명서가 친절하게 준비되어 있었고, 플레이팅이나 일부 요리에서의 기법은 양식에서 차용한 것들도 있어서 전통 일본식 가이카세라기 보다는 퓨전 스타일의 느낌을 받았다. 미슐랭 가이드 오사카에서 연속으로 별 2개 획득한 일본 요리 전문점입니다. 네이버 블로그 전체보기 1,315개의 글 목록열기.

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.