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.

또한 탁재훈 집안에 대해서도 잠시 알아 보고자 합니다. 탁재훈 아버지는 우리나라에 1051년 레미콘 회사가 있다. 180억원父 재산 언급 탁재훈, 딱 걸렸다女데이트 목격담에 진땀 어저께tv 돌싱포맨에서 탁재훈이 여자와 있다는 목격담에 진땀을 뺀 가운데, 180. 지난 3일 방송된 원탁의 변호사들 4회에서는 매회 충격적인 사연을 보고도 결혼 생각이 있었던 mc 신규진마저 결혼을.

코우키 미아

코네 메이드

또한 탁재훈 집안에 대해서도 잠시 알아 보고자 합니다. 지난 9일 방송된 sbs 신발 벗고 돌싱포맨에는 이상엽, 이정, 이석훈이 게스트로 출연했다. 이로 인해 탁재훈은 레미콘 프린스, 콘수저라고도 불렸던 바. 최근 방송된 sbs ‘신발 벗고 돌싱포맨’에서는 탁재훈이 아버지 재산 기부에 대해 언급했다. 결혼하면 모든 게 안정될 줄 알았는데 결혼 후 오히려 더 불안해졌다고들 한다고 입을 열었다.

30세 이하 사절 탁재훈, 나이트클럽에, 고향 서울특별시 은평구 녹번동에서 태어났습니다. 레미콘 회사 회장 탁배훈 아버지 배조웅 씨를 향한 관심이 뜨겁다. 앞서 지난 6월 방송에서도 이상민이 제가 보기엔 탁재훈 아버지가 사회에 기부하실 것 같다라고 이야기하자, 탁재훈은 나 그러면 아버지 호적에서 팔 거야라고 말해 폭소탄을 터뜨렸다. 아버지가 모든 재산 환원하신다면 어떨지 묻자 탁재훈은 제 허락없이는이라며 망설이더니 그런 멘트하시면 아버지 멘트는.

코네 구국룰

탁재훈 아버지는 우리나라에 1051년 레미콘 회사가 있다.. Com › board › view나락갔었던 탁재훈 부활 과정..

미운우리새끼372회 김승수결혼 김승수 결혼상대자 김승수 재산 디시 김승수재산, 이상민은 결혼 후에 깨닫는 것들이 있다며 결혼하면 모든 게 안정될 줄. 11일 방송된 sbs예능 신발벗고 돌싱포맨에서 이상민은 이혜정의 아버지가 사회에 전 재산을 환원한 일을 언급했다. 최근 디시인사이드 갤러리 등에는 저 나이에도 나이트 뛰는 탁재훈 재산분할 때문.

김승수는 약 10년 전 드라마 촬영 중에 발생한 일을 언급하며, 어느 날 식당에서 우리 테이블의 계산을 해주겠다는 분이 계산대에 있었다. 타로와 20년 지기 우정, 김승수의 질문. 탁재훈은 연예인으로서 활동을 하여 데뷔한 계기는 1998년에 컨츄리꼬꼬라는 듀엣가수로서 데뷔를 하게 되었지요, 공식 인증 받은 신정환 도박 정보창구로서 신정환 도박의 특허 출원 콘텐츠와 공신력 있는 뉴스,안전한 슬롯 사이트、스포츠분석법인포그래픽 자료를 공식 제공.

타로와 20년 지기 우정, 김승수의 질문. Kr copyright ⓒ 세계속에 新한류를 연예전문 온라인미디어 티브이데일리. 탁재훈 20대 무명시절 썰jpg 실시간 베스트 갤러리, 유명인 사주 162개의 글 목록열기 이웃 블로거. 최근 근황 모습으로는 예능 창작의 신에서 진행을 맡았습니다. 탁재훈 나이탁재훈의 나이는 현재 55살이며, 탁재훈 생일은 1968년 7월 24일입니다.

키타가와 마린 히토미 그의 재력은 180억원 자산이라고 전해진 바 있다. 스포츠한국 신영선 기자돌싱포맨 탁재훈이 180억 자산가 아버지를 언급했다. 한눈에 보는 오늘 방송가요 뉴스 스포츠한국 신영선 기자돌싱포맨 탁재훈이 180억 자산가 아버지를 언급했다. 탁재훈 나이탁재훈의 나이는 현재 55살이며, 탁재훈 생일은 1968년 7월 24일입니다. 절친 이혜영의의 마라맛 이혼 토크에 당황한 탁재훈의 폭주ㅋㅋ. 콴시 키시베 디시

쿠주 트위터 탁재훈 나이탁재훈의 나이는 현재 55살이며, 탁재훈 생일은 1968년 7월 24일입니다. 정신이 피폐화 황폐화 되는데 여자만나서 재미 read more. 최근 방송된 sbs 예능 프로그램 신발 벗고 돌싱포맨에서는 이상엽, 이정, 이석훈이 게스트로 출연해 재치 있는 입담을 선보였다. 신정환 도박 학습을 위한 최고의 자료와 도구. 11일 방송된 sbs예능 신발벗고 돌싱포맨에서. 키치 초대남

키오프 벨 엉덩이 순재산 합계가 14억 정도이다라고 설명했다. 절친 이혜영의의 마라맛 이혼 토크에 당황한 탁재훈의 폭주ㅋㅋ. 이어 김수지 기자는 근저당이라든가 대출, 그리고 세금이 압류가 되어 있다. 가수 겸 방송인 탁재훈이 아버지 재산에 대해 언급했다. 그 바람에 갈 곳 없어진 어머니를 집에 모심3. 코믹마트 차서 율 나이

타부치 마사히로 품번 10일 방송되는 tv chosun 예능 ‘내 멋대로과몰입클럽’이하 ‘내 멋대로’ 2회에서는 콘텐츠 제작에 과몰입하는 탁재훈의 일상이 그려진다. 사진유튜브 채널 스발바르 저장고 갈무리 탁재훈은 2001년 진보식품 이승준 회장의 딸이자 슈퍼모델인 이모씨와 결혼했지만, 2014년 성격 차이를 이유로 이혼 소송을 냈다. 이로 인해 탁재훈은 레미콘 프린스, 콘수저라고도 불렸던 바. 그럼 탁재훈의 과거사진, 전부인, 도박, 재산 등 다양한 정보들을 하나씩 알아보도록. 그리고 탁재훈 재산에 대해서도 언급을 해 볼까요.

코네 뜻 고향 서울특별시 은평구 녹번동에서 태어났습니다. 미운우리새끼372회 김승수결혼 김승수 결혼상대자 김승수 재산 디시 김승수재산. 탁재훈 프로필 나이, 키, 수상, 재산, 아버지, mbti, 고향, 유튜브 등탁재훈 본명탁재훈의 본명은 배성우입니다. Sbs 미운 우리 새끼에서 배조웅 회장는 가업 승계가 read more. 이날 탁재훈 아버지는 배조웅 씨는 전국에 1051개 레미콘 회사가 있다.

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.