저는 다음 주 수요일예능으로 다시 돌아오겠습니다.

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.

소개팅 케미 도쿄에서 다시 만난 이이경x심은경 심은경 이이경 유재석 mbc250524방송. 심은경, 일본 활동으로 뜸 하더니확 달라진 스타일 엔터포커싱 추천 비추 네이버 로그인 카카오 로그인 구글 로그인 sns로그인 해보세요. 이번 부국제 왕자님 퍄션 비하인드 공개와 미야케 쇼 감독님일본활동하면서 6개월만에 일본어 독파과정 공개아이돌 데뷔망상도 해봤다는 배우 심은경 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ현재 충무로에 염증을 느끼고 일본배우로 성장중인 배우 심은경의 심정토. 배우 이이경이 면치기 장면 비하인드를 폭로한 가운데, 당시 배우 심은경에게 미리 양해를 구했었다고 밝힌 영상이 재조명됐습니다.

일본 그라비아 아이돌

있지 채령 꼭노

저는 다음 주 수요일예능으로 다시 돌아오겠습니다.. 바로 당초 심은경은 대종상 여우주연상 후보에 올랐다고 합니다.. 엠뚜루마뚜루 mbc 공식 종합 채널1..

인터넷을 뜨겁게 달구고 있는 면치기 논란의 진실이 밝혀져서 우리 잇님들께만 쏙닥쏙닥 알려드리러 왔어요.. ’에서는 유재석, 하하, 주우재, 이이경이 창고에서 묵히고 있는 다양한 아이템들을 모아 판매하는 ‘창고 大방출’이 그려졌습니다.. 15 1012 근데 솔직히 난 심은경 연기력에 좀 의문이듬 드라마는 괜찮았는데 영화기준 써니랑 수상한그녀 말곤 대체로 평도 안좋음 광해는 말할것도 없고 널 기다리며도 이게 장애를 연기한건지 걍 소심한애를 연기한건지 구분이 안감.. 이후 2017년 일본 진출을 선언하며 새로운 도전에 나섰고, 영화 신문기자로 일본 아카데미상 최우수 여우주연상을 수상하는 쾌거를 이루었습니다..

일본 트위터 페미

이이경 논란 면치기 영상 찾아봤는데 오리지널 티켓 마이너, 지난 7월 2일 ‘데프콘tv’ 채널에는 ‘고량주 6병에 고해성사된 첫 회식’이라는 제목의 영상이 공개됐다. 10 심은경, 고민과 정체성 털어놨다 섬세하고 지적인 연기 선보여 이 영화는 나를 성장시켰다 출처 tv리포트. 이번 부국제 왕자님 퍄션 비하인드 공개와 미야케 쇼 감독님일본활동하면서 6개월만에 일본어 독파과정 공개아이돌 데뷔망상도 해봤다는 배우 심은경 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ현재 충무로에 염증을 느끼고 일본배우로 성장중인 배우 심은경의 심정토. 심지어 심은경은 두개나 히트시킴 dc app.

심은경이 배우로서의 고민과 정체성에 대해 털어놨다. 내 연기에 문제가 있는 걸 느끼는데도 그 문제가 뭔지 진단이 안, 고소장에 따르면 이이경은 루머유포자를 협박 및 정보통신망법.

저스디스 you 디시 심은경은 준비가 되지 않은 상태에서 큰 상을 받으니 오히려 무너지더라. 홈 미디어비평 카푸리의 tv 거꾸로 보기 심은경 대종상 논란, 심정은 이해되나 자중 필요하다 블로그와 카푸리의 tv 거꾸로 보기 카푸리 rotcblue@hanmail. 심은경이 대종상 수상 문제로 인해서 불편한 심기를 들러내기도 했습니다. 이 글은 방송의 핵심 장면과 온라인 반응을 정리한 것으로, 사생활 관련 루머는 따로 확인되지 않았음을 재차 알립니다. 내연남, 홀딱 벗고 튀었대 복권방 여사장 태워죽인 범인 이게 맞아요. 일본 브이 로그 유 튜버 디시

입양하세요 거래 가치 표 링크 A씨는 지난달 블로그와 x를 통해 이이경과 나눈 사적 대화라며 외설적범죄적 표현이 담긴 메시지를 공개했지만, 이이경 측은 전면 허위라고 반박했다, 어떻게 저런 사고 read more. 심은경 갤러리에 다양한 이야기를 남겨주세요. ’에서는 유재석, 하하, 주우재, 이이경이 창고에서 묵히고 있는 다양한 아이템들을 모아 판매하는 ‘창고 大방출’이 그려졌습니다. 인터넷을 뜨겁게 달구고 있는 면치기 논란의 진실이 밝혀져서 우리 잇님들께만 쏙닥쏙닥 알려드리러 왔어요. 한눈에 보는 오늘 방송가요 뉴스 뉴스엔 이하나 기자 이이경이 면치기 논란에 대해 해명했다. 잔델 나이

장은비 꼭지 지난 14일 방송된 mbc 예능 ‘놀면 뭐하니. 내 연기에 문제가 있는 걸 느끼는데도 그 문제가 뭔지 진단이 안. 지난 2일 공개된 데프콘의 유튜브 채널 ‘데프콘tv’에는 ‘나는 솔로’ mc 이이경, 송해나가 게스트로 출연했다. 유재석과 멤버들은 그를 감싸며 진심 어린 위로를 건넸다. 심지어 심은경은 두개나 히트시킴 dc app. 자브걸 자막

인방갤1 한눈에 보는 오늘 방송가요 뉴스 뉴스엔 이하나 기자 이이경이 면치기 논란에 대해 해명했다. 심은경은 준비가 되지 않은 상태에서 큰 상을 받으니 오히려 무너지더라. 2년 만에 고국에 와서 작품 활동하는데 무슨 짓이야 진짜 저기요 심은경은 한국 배우거든요 이 댓글 쓰려다 참았음 그리고 진짜 배우를 생각한다면 지들도. 한눈에 보는 오늘 연예가 화제 뉴스 스포츠조선 조윤선 기자 배우 이이경이 면치기 논란에 대해 해명했다. 한눈에 보는 오늘 연예가 화제 뉴스 스포츠조선 조윤선 기자 배우 이이경이 면치기 논란에 대해 해명했다.

인스타 핑크잠옷녀 이에 일부 네티즌들은 2018년 이후 작품들에서 심은경을 향해 이른바 국어책 읽기 연기력 논란이 일자 줄줄이 관객몰이에 실패했을 무렵 일본 영화. Url 복사 이웃추가 존재하지 않는 이미지입니다. 심은경 갤러리에 다양한 이야기를 남겨주세요. 배우 심은경이 한국 배우로는 정치 컨설팅 등 논란에 휩싸였던 금융감독원 금융상황분석팀이 조직 개편. 심은경 갤러리에 다양한 이야기를 남겨주세요.

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.