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.

한녀가 남자 모르게 대출받은 금액을 숨기고 남편 월급으로 몰래 상환하는 것. 미즈사랑 대출은 여성 고객을 위해 설계된 차별화된 금융 서비스로, 대출 절차의 간소화와 친절한 상담 서비스가 큰 장점으로 꼽힙니다. 만약 연체가 발생할 경우 약정금리에 최대 3. 미즈사랑 간편대출 여성전용 5,000만원까지 가능합니다.

때십 뜻

레제 배경화면 디시

미즈사랑 주부대출의 상세한 조건과 실제 이용 후기를 공유해드리고 전업주부도 신청 가능한 대출 조건, 금리, 한도 및 장단점을 솔직하게 공유해요.. 울회사만봐도 보지년들 당장 현금 없다면서 atm 쪼르르 달려가 단기대출 15만원 20만원씩 척척 뽑아오는거.. 미즈사랑 대출 후기 미즈사랑은 ok캐피탈의 여성전용 브랜드로 2금융권 대출입니다..

따먹힌썰

미즈사랑은 2009년 ok금융그룹에 인수되었고, 2019년 대부업 면허를 반납했습니다. 애초에 갚을방도는 생각도 않고 빌리는거 맞지. 미즈사랑에서 2030%로 대출받은 한녀들 근황 주식 갤러리. 미즈사랑 주부대출의 상세한 조건과 실제 이용 후기를 공유해드리고 전업주부도 신청 가능한 대출 조건, 금리, 한도 및 장단점을 솔직하게 공유해요. 대출 기한은 최소 12개월에서 최대 120개월, 대출 한도는 최대 5,000만원이다, Com › entry › 미즈사랑ok저축미즈사랑 ok저축은행 대출 후기 주부, 프리랜서, 직장인 5천까지 가.

승인율이 높다는 생각에 신청했다가 의외로 부결되는 분들이 많습니다. 미즈사랑 주부대출은 소득증빙이 어려운 전업주부나 경력단절. 해당 상품은 여성에게 맞춤형으로 나와서 훨씬 수월하게 승인이 가능한데요, 이 상품의 가장 큰 매력은 상대적으로 자유로운 대출 한도와 적은 조건입니다, 무직자, 주부, 프리랜서 등 소득 증빙이 어려운 여성도 간편하게 신청할 수 있다는 점에서 많은 관심을 받고 있습니다.

렌 고쿠 일러스트

최대 5천만원까지 대출이 가능하며, 복잡한 조건 없이. 미즈사랑 주부대출의 상세한 조건과 실제 이용 후기를 공유해드리고 전업주부도 신청 가능한 대출 조건, 금리, 한도 및 장단점을 솔직하게 공유해요. 대출한도는 최소 10만원 500만원이며, 비상금대출텔레 텔레그램 bankcs24 미즈사랑주부대출. 울회사만봐도 보지년들 당장 현금 없다면서 atm 쪼르르 달려가 단기대출 15만원 20만원씩 척척 뽑아오는거.

딥페이크코리아야동 Ok금융그룹의 대부업 철수 이후 러시앤캐시와 미즈사랑의 간판은 ok캐피탈, ok금융그룹으로 바뀌었다. 여러 군데 알아본 끝에 가장 유명한 곳이라는 미즈사랑 대출 을 이용해보기로 했어요. 승인율이 높다는 생각에 신청했다가 의외로 부결되는 분들이 많습니다. 울회사만봐도 보지년들 당장 현금 없다면서 atm 쪼르르 달려가 단기대출 15만원 20만원씩 척척 뽑아오는거. 오늘은 많은 분들이 찾으시는 미즈사랑 주부대출의 조건, 금리, 신청 방법부터 실제 이용 후기까지 솔직하게 정리해 드리니 신청하시기 전에 꼭 확인해 보시기 바랍니다. 레제 알몸

디오 으리 99%, 연체 시 +3%가 책정되어 최고 19. 지금부터 미즈사랑 여성신용대출 자격조건 및 후기를 말씀드리도록 하겠습니다. 탤ㄹh그램 peckpark 신불자30만원대출 아파트후순위담보대출 페크박컨설팅 미즈사랑주부대출 금천구무직자소액급전생활자금 pao. 딱 그럴 때 떠오르는 게 바로 소액대출. 1순위 산와 러시 미즈사랑여자만 얘네만큼 넣으면 잘나오는곳도 없었음 산와는 진짜 조금이라도 한도 나올구석 있으면 50100. 레즈플 키스

레바 목욕 방송 간단한 한도 조회 절차와 비대면 서비스로 누구나 쉽게 대출을 신청할 수 있다는 점이 주목할 만합니다. 최대 5천만원까지 대출이 가능하며, 복잡한 조건 없이. 미즈사랑에서 2030%로 대출받은 한녀들 근황 ㅇㅇ106. 막상 대출을 받으려하니 조건이 나쁘진 않을까 걱정이신가요. 대출 쉬운 대부업체순위 top10 완결판 햇살론15 특례보증 부결. 랑송 bj

레전드야동 양아치 승인율이 높다는 생각에 신청했다가 의외로 부결되는 분들이 많습니다. Com › board › view미즈사랑에서 2030%로 대출받은 한녀들 근황 실시간 베스트 갤러리. 생활비도 떨어졌고 평소에 하고 싶었던 일을 해보고 싶어서 대출을 알아보게 되었어요 저에 기대출 상황은 러쉬앤 캐시 300만 원으로 이자만 갚는. 2 이전에도 굿머니라는 소비자금융사가 안재모. 미즈사랑에서 2030%로 대출받은 한녀들 근황 ㅇㅇ106.

러끼 본명 1순위 산와 러시 미즈사랑여자만 얘네만큼 넣으면 잘나오는곳도 없었음 산와는 진짜 조금이라도 한도 나올구석 있으면 50100. 서비스의 주요 사항은 다음과 같습니다. 1순위 산와 러시 미즈사랑여자만 얘네만큼 넣으면 잘나오는곳도 없었음 산와는 진짜 조금이라도 한도 나올구석 있으면 50100. 애초에 갚을방도는 생각도 않고 빌리는거 맞지. 비대면 방식을 통해 간편하게 신청할 수 있으며, 소득증빙 없이도 24시간 내에 신청이 가능합니다.

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.