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.

Com › mgallery › board코로스 페이스3 장비리뷰 갤럭시 워치4 비교 러닝 마이너 갤러리. 약 10일전 내 이메일과 코로스 홈페이지에 뜬금 없이 동영상이 하나 올라. 코로스 페이스4 스펙 정리 페이스3와 페이스 프로와 비교. 코로스 노마드도 시계예쁘던데 노마드는 버튼이 3개인것 같아서 페이스4로가면서 버튼 늘었을 수도 있겠다싶기두 dc app 11.

물 금고 이소윤

페이스4는 $249279 정도로 예상하는듯함.. 페이스 딜레이 68초 정도 되는데 일정속도로 쭉 달릴땐.. Com › hg2439 › 224164705828코로스 페이스4 리뷰와 후기 네이버 블로그..

문서 윤 남친

Com › board › running코로스 페이스4 기대된다 러닝 마이너 갤러리, 적립금, 카드 적립, 쿠키 신공까지 하면 실 체감가는 42만원 언더일듯 가민 사망해서 페이스3 or 페이스프로 보는 중입니다. 본인 265 페이스 3 페이스 4로 기변. 평소 512km정도 600페이스로 조깅하는 런닌이 임을 밝히고 시작합니다. 2인치 프로보다 가벼움 나일론스트랩 프로 37g 페4 32g 프로와 배터리 시간은 대동소이함 싱글gps모드 aod끔 프로 38시간 페4 41시간. 코로스 페이스4 심박수 정확도 질문 러닝 마이너 갤러리.

코로스 페이스4출시 예상가격, 스펙, 출시일정 coros pace4 가성비 러닝워치로 인기가 많은 코로스 페이스4. 갤워치말고 265비교해도 확실히빠른거보면 뭔가 신버전 오면서 개선이있지싶음. 코로스 노마드도 시계예쁘던데 노마드는 버튼이 3개인것 같아서 페이스4로가면서 버튼 늘었을 수도 있겠다싶기두 dc app 11, 일단 코로스는 앱 인터페이스가 너무 편함 dc.

진짜 페이스 개칼같이 잡아줘서 대회나 평소에 오버페이스 안 하게되고 터널 밑 지나가게 되는 대회때도 거리를 정확하게 잡아줘서 레이스 운영에도 나이스임. 코로스코리아 공식몰, 마라톤 세계 1위 킵초게가 선택한 아웃도어시계 코로스페이스, 코로스버틱스, 249달러면 가민165랑 순토run 출시가랑 가격 똑같음 11, Redirecting to sgall. 일단 코로스는 앱 인터페이스가 너무 편함 dc.

미소녀들의 섹스파티

러닝 마이너 갤러리 설정 연관 갤러리 214 new연관 갤러리 열기 이용안내 더보기 갤러리별 설정.. 최근에 코로스 페이스 프로 직구를 했고 기존에 사용 중이던 포러너255s랑 테스트 중에 있음.. 코로스 페이스4, 국내 정식 출시는 1월 중순으로 확정되었습니다..

미츠리짤

페이스4는 $249279 정도로 예상하는듯함, Com › mgallery › board코로스 페이스4 그냥 예상 스펙인듯 러닝 마이너 갤러리. 과거에는 애플 피트니스를 애플워치 쓰다가 오늘 코로스 페이스 4로 변경했는데 과거 애플 피트니스 데이터를 코로스로 옮길수 있나요. 진짜 페이스 개칼같이 잡아줘서 대회나 평소에 오버페이스 안 하게되고 터널 밑 지나가게 되는 대회때도 거리를 정확하게 잡아줘서 레이스 운영에도 나이스임.

미다레우치1 솔직히 무슨 차이인지도 모르겠는데 괜히 최신형 사고싶음 ㅇ. 근데 페4가 조금더가볍고, 갤워치 최근버전들 장점이 착용감이었는데 페이스4 얘가 착용감이 더좋음. 코로스 페이스4 리뷰와 후기 도토리줍는다람쥐 ・ 17시간 전 url 복사 이웃추가 장거리 러닝 35km을 목표로 달리고 있었는데, 애플워치se가 중간에 꺼져버리는 바람에 그날 기분 잡쳤습니다. 아마 여러분은 워치4로 러닝을 잘 하고 있었으나갑자기 기변병이 왔고한편 굳이. 갤워치4쓰다가 장비병이 생겨서 가민으로 가기엔 금액이 부담되어 코로스3를 구입하였고. 민또 경또 로 블록 스 공포 게임

물고기 눈알 가민 265 쓰다가 코로스로 넘어간 가장 큰 이유가 갤에 올라오는 훈지 보면 코로스가 ui가 진짜 직관적으로. 솔직히 무슨 차이인지도 모르겠는데 괜히 최신형 사고싶음 ㅇ. 본인 265 페이스 3 페이스 4로 기변. 01 0025 달리는춘식이 @늘피비킵고잉 버튼이 편하드라 ㅋ 페이스3 에서 올레드로만 바껴도 난 만족이라 dc app 11. 누가 먼저 나올까나온 놈으로 바꿔야지 dc official app. 미국 섹트

미츠리 남친 Com › board › running코로스 페이스4 20달러 오르는듯 러닝 마이너 갤러리. 28 003536 삭제 글쓴 런갤러116. 러닝을 하면서 월 4천원씩 적립해서 책이나 다양한 포인트로 활용가능한 앱이 있으니 러닝워치및 핸드폰에. 코로스 페이스4출시 예상가격, 스펙, 출시일정 coros pace4 가성비 러닝워치로 인기가 많은 코로스 페이스4. 코로스 페이스 3 쓰시는 분들 질문좀 드리겠습니다. 미사 벗방

미코 인스타 디시 본인 265 페이스 3 페이스 4로 기변. 팟2 없이도 실시간 페이스좀 잘 잡아주고. 2인치 프로보다 가벼움 나일론스트랩 프로 37g 페4 32g 프로와 배터리 시간은 대동소이함 싱글gps모드 aod끔 프로 38시간 페4 41시간. 갤워치4쓰다가 장비병이 생겨서 가민으로 가기엔 금액이 부담되어 코로스3를 구입하였고. 이전의 페이스 시리즈들은 실리콘, 나일론 밴드의 선택이 가능했지만 페이스 프로는 나일론 스트랩 고정이다.

문서윤 인스타 Com › board › running코로스 페이스4 스펙 정리 페이스3와 페이스 프로와 비교 러닝 마. 일단 아몰레드 터치 디스플레이가 탑재되었다는 점에서 반가워하시는 분들이 많으실 것 같은데요. 아몰레드에 디자인좀 이쁘게 나오면 좋겟다. 가치 있는 제품을 원한다면 이 시계는 타의 추종을 불허하는 가격으로 프리미엄급 러닝 지표를 제공합니다. 러닝 마이너 갤러리 설정 연관 갤러리 214 new연관 갤러리 열기 이용안내 더보기 갤러리별 설정.

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.