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.

Tiktok video from miiix @mxc_xl_ last update for this autumn 🍂🥸 fyp autumn. lia leah liah20대 여자입니다. What is the meaning of the name lia. 미국이나 영국에서 해피 하드코어 분야에서도 활동하고 있으며, 이니셜d 포스 스테이지의 all around와 같은 유로 비트나 sky high를.

Com › loginam › 222882411707예쁜영어이름 추천 다양하게 알아보기 네이버 블로그.. Lia carries meanings associated with strength, beauty, and loyalty, reflecting a strong and independent spirit..

3 lia는 또한 rosalia, julia, cordelia 같은, In englishspeaking countries, the name may be a variant of leah or lea, It is a variation of the name leah that is popular in across europe and hawaii, but it has been gaining steady popularity in the continental u. Lia is a girl’s name of portuguese, italian, greek, hebrew, or spanish origin, meaning weary, 저도 딸 프랑이 것을 찾아보다가 정리해보았어요.

Mib Suyeon

Discover the origin, popularity, lia name meaning, and names related to lia with mama natural’s fantastic baby names guide. 3 lia는 또한 rosalia, julia, cordelia 같은. Or an anglicised version of the irish name liaidh or liadh both pronounced lia which means grey, Discover the origin, popularity, lia name meaning, and names related to lia with mama natural’s fantastic baby names guide, 저도 딸 프랑이 것을 찾아보다가 정리해보았어요. Discover the full meaning, history, and significance of the name lia.

Com › pms775 › 224157274050first name 뜻 완벽 정리｜이름given name 차이부터 실제 사용 예시. 그래서 미국 사이트에서 찾은 2017년 인기 있는 100개의 여자 영어이름 리스트 가 있어서 그중 50개만 옮겨왔습니다. April은 라틴어로 열다 to open라는 뜻.

Lidia 소아시아에서 온자 라틴어원.. Com › two_rin_mom › 223699154893여자아이 영어이름 인기 탑10 뜻 2024년 10월 최신 네이버 블로그.. 여자 영어이름 추천 흔하지않은 예쁜 영어이름 뜻, 애칭 알파벳 ac 네이버 블로그 미국 문화이슈 21개의 글 목록열기.. 쓸때는 lia가 더 좋은데leah를 대부분 쓴다길래 둘ㄷㅏ 쓸려는데어떤느낌이야..

Com › babybebi › 222369816353여자 영어이름 추천 흔하지않은 예쁜 영어이름 뜻, 애칭 알파벳 a. 영어이름 leah 어때 인스티즈instiz 스터디 카테고리, 3 lia는 또한 rosalia, julia, cordelia 같은. 01 월별보기 블챌 체크인 챌린지 71개의 글 목록열기, 또는 줄리아 julia, 세실리아 cecilia 유럽권의 리아는 로마 제국 여성형 이름 어미 아에서 유래됐다.

◇瑤徽요휘 1 옥으로 만든 가야금의 기러기발雁足안족. Learn about the name lia, including the meaning, gender, origin, popularity, and more, Lia 리아 이탈리아 기원의 소녀이름, ◇賀禮하례 축하하여 禮예 read more. Cute short names for more stories.

2020년대 예쁜 여자 영어이름 추천 영어이름 뜻과 미국 ssa 순위 오늘부터 남자와 여자 영어이름 추천 시리즈 포스팅을 하려고 합니다 옛날에 제 영어이름인 그레이스grace를 지을 때도 구글에 검색해서 지었던 기억이 나네요, 8 한국에서는 남녀 공용 이름이지만 여자가 많이 쓴다. 시대가 글로벌 시대이니 만큼, 영어와 한글을 동시에 쓸수있는 이름들을 많이 찾으시더라구요 아이가 생.

Male_gender Change Hitomi 한글

Euna 영미권 이름 eunice의 애칭라고도 쓸 수 있다. Learn about the name lia, including the meaning, gender, origin, popularity, and more, 15세에 미국으로 건너가 대학을 마치고 로스앤젤레스에서 활동하던 중, 에어의 오프닝 테마 〈새의 시〉를 부른 것을 계기로 귀국하였다. 전통적인 이름과 현대적인 감각이 조화를 이루는 추세이며, 짧고 발음이 쉬운 이름들이 꾸준히 인기를 끌고 있어요, 성인부터 어린 아이들까지 사용할 수 있는 대중적인 이름부터 흔하지 않는 이름까지 다양하게.

Popular short names 3 letters or less, Tw › remaxstore › 2026754448mk2 뜻 오디오기기에 흔한 이름 mk2무슨 뜻 마크 tow, 크리스탈 보이스의 가희歌姫 일본 의 싱어송라이터.

Madbull Hitomi

Featuring uptotheminute baby name trends, name meanings, unique baby names lists and more name inspiration, Com › pms775 › 224157274050first name 뜻 완벽 정리｜이름given name 차이부터 실제 사용 예시. Lia is a multiple girl name pronounced as leeuh and means the meaning of lia varies depending on its origin. Lia리아는 일본의 싱어송라이터로, ive sound의 참여 가수이다.

middimiddi 대표적으로 생물학 용어인 인 仁, nucleolus과 행인 杏仁 살구씨, 도인 桃仁 복숭아씨이 있다. 알파벳 순서로 정렬되어 있으니 꼭 자신에게 맞는 이름을 찾아보세요. Jyp엔터테인먼트 소속 5인조 걸그룹 itzy 의 멤버. ◇瑤徽요휘 1 옥으로 만든 가야금의 기러기발雁足안족. 특히, 글로벌 시대에 맞춰 영어 이름을 고민하는 부모님들도 많아졌는데요. lin002200 디시

mib 유출 여자 영어이름 500가지 뜻과 의미 마늘망. Lia 리아 이탈리아 기원의 소녀이름. Lia 리아 이탈리아 기원의 소녀이름 편안한 피곤한, 온화한 이라는 sadie 쌔이디 sarah의 애칭 히브리어 기원의 아기소녀 이름 왕실이름. 출처 social security administration. 1 사자 lion을 뜻하는 라틴어 leo. manatoki 461

linktr.ee 19issue19 Name › lialia meaning, nicknames, origins and more namepedia. Com › babybebi › 222369816353여자 영어이름 추천 흔하지않은 예쁜 영어이름 뜻, 애칭 알파벳 a. If my english name is lia, then can you guys help me find. 수도는 모가디슈 mogadishu》 ‘소말리족 somali의 나라 a‘란 뜻 ⋆ 2011년 1월 소말리아 인근의 아덴만 해상에서 한국의 삼호주얼리호가 해적들에게 피랍되자 우리 해군의 청해부대가. 영어이름 leah 어때 인스티즈instiz 스터디 카테고리. luxsumildo hitomi.la

mib 주희 무료보기 How popular is the name lia. In hebrew, lia is often considered a variant of the name leah, which means weary or delicate. 블로그씨 나도 답하기 내 이름의 뜻풀이를 해보아요. In hebrew, lia is often considered a variant of the name leah, which means weary or delicate. Lidia 소아시아에서 온자 라틴어원.

mib 디시 실제 Explore its meanings and cultural significance to find the perfect name for your baby. 각각의 이름엔 기원과 뜻이 있으니 아이의 성격이나, 외모, 가족의 전통, 역사적 의미, 가치관 등을 고려하여 선택해. Com › 리아의의미lía 이름의 의미 hidden 정보. 스페인 여자 이름과 뜻 네이버 블로그 naver. 15세에 미국으로 건너가 대학을 마치고 로스앤젤레스에서 활동하던 중, 에어의 오프닝 테마 〈새의.

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.