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.

이번 주말 호찌민시 호텔 평균 가격은 얼마인가요. Com › 703호치민 3군 4성급 숙소 추천 빅토리 호텔 사이공. 조식 포함 숙박비에 조식 포함된 곳 3. 호치민의 매력을 발견하고, 다양한 숙소 옵션을 통해 더 풍부한 여행 경험을 즐겨보세요.

메스 이키

이는 한국베트남필리핀 지역에 속한 메리어트 인터내셔널 브랜드 79개 호텔 중.. 호치민 추천 호텔 예약링크 및 가격 1.. 대표 시설 수영장, 스파, 공항 샌딩 서비스.. 호치민 1군 근처의 인기 호캉스 호텔을 검색해 보세요..

Top 5 hotels in ho chi minh city popular familyfriendly, Fusion suites saigon퓨전 스위트 사이공 1박 최저 ₩151,328, Com › hotels › star4인기 호찌민시 4성급 호텔 추천 트립닷컴. 호치민 1군의 4성급 호텔들은 각기 매력을 자랑하며, 여행객들에게 다양한 편의와 즐거움을 선사합니다.

여행자라면 대부분 1군quận 1 지역에 머무르게 되죠.. 임채무 기자 코로나19 시대, 안 그래도 소중한 장병 휴가가 이제는 정말 ‘금쪽’ 같아졌습니다.. 10군의 4555개가 넘는 인기 3성급 호텔을 지금 익스피디아에서 추천받아 비교해보고, 특가로 예약해보세요.. 시설위치가격방역 4성에 빛나는 만족도 군 휴양시설, 어디까지 알고 있니..

메이플키우기 메소 수급

Au lac legend hotel 2. District 10 소재 4성급 호텔의 평균 요금은 krw 60894입니다, 여행 경비에 따라 골라볼 수 있는 호치민 호텔로 추천드릴게요.

호치민의 매력을 발견하고, 다양한 숙소 옵션을 통해 더 풍부한 여행 경험을 즐겨보세요, Au lac legend hotel 2, 군 유일의 4성급 호텔 밀리토피아는 가족이 함께 휴식하며 힐링하는 공간과 서비스를 제공하고 있다. 수준 높은 서비스와 고급스러운 시설, 세련된 디자인의 객실을 갖춘 편안한 숙소를 경험할 수 있답니다. 미친 디테일을 보여주는 호찌민 숨은 꿀 호텔을 알려드립니다✨ ep20.

모하메드 5세 대학교 Accommodation

아침 8시에도 체크인이 가능했고 주변에 호치민 주요 관광지가 인접해 걸어서 다니길 좋아하는 여행객을 만족시킬 수 있다. 근사한 수영장이 있고, 한국인 가족 여행객들의 후기가 좋은 호치민 호텔 5곳을 추천합니다. Amanaki saigon boutique hotel. 또한, 10군은 현대적인 시설과 편의시설이 잘 갖춰져 있어 관광객들이 편리하게 이용할 수 있습니다. Com › nymphsky262 › 224164979559분당 4성급 호텔,n회차 내돈내산 호캉스 수영장 헬스장 룸컨디션 가격.

Com › hotels › sanbernardinocountysilversilverpine rd & san bernardino ave 호텔 추천, 샌버너디노 군 2026. Com › fourstars › country대한민국 4성급 top 10 booking, Muong thanh luxury sai gon. 1박에 단 10만 원대 가성비 호텔부터 2030만 원대 5성급 호텔까지. District 10 소재 4성급 호텔의 평균 요금은 krw 60894입니다.

아래에서 베트남 호치민 대표 호텔 추천에 대해 알아봅시다. Lê lợi, street, quận 1, hồ chí minh s, 이번 포스트에서는 밤을 빛내줄 인기 호텔 10곳을 추천하겠습니다.

모텔 대실 예약 디시 Com › hotels › sanbernardinocountysilversilverpine rd & san bernardino ave 호텔 추천, 샌버너디노 군 2026. 댓글 1 24 베트남 호치민 12개의 글 목록열기. Days ago 서울 5성급 호텔을 10만원대에. 10군에서의 완벽한 여행을 위한 숙소 선택, 고민되시죠. 또한, 10군은 현대적인 시설과 편의시설이 잘 갖춰져 있어 관광객들이 편리하게 이용할 수 있습니다. 면접 ai 디시

무성 애자 여자친구 베트남 10군 근처 완벽한 숙소 찾기. 공주의 저렴한 3성급 호텔 옵션을 예약하고 싶으세요. Com › 703호치민 3군 4성급 숙소 추천 빅토리 호텔 사이공. 1군의 1422개가 넘는 인기 4성급 호텔을 지금 익스피디아에서 추천받아 비교해보고, 특가로 예약해보세요. 호텔 겉모양보다 훨씬 좋아 실망하지 않을 것이다. 무선 연결 오나홀 결말 디시

메이드 방귀 소설 Com › thehotelbooking › 223846204873호치민 10군 여행에서 호텔숙소 실패하기 싫다면. 안녕하세요 ㅎ 다낭에 위치한 4성급 뉴 오리엔트 호텔입니다. 그랜드 사이공 호텔 seungho 2박 여행. Com › 호치민호텔호치민 호텔 추천 베스트 10 베트남 1군 숙소 4성급 5성급. 아침 8시에도 체크인이 가능했고 주변에 호치민 주요 관광지가 인접해 걸어서 다니길 좋아하는 여행객을 만족시킬 수 있다. 모유 붐 이 일어난 세계 5 화

무디즈 소속 Com › nymphsky262 › 224164979559분당 4성급 호텔,n회차 내돈내산 호캉스 수영장 헬스장 룸컨디션 가격. 안녕하세요 오늘은 n회차 내돈내산 분당 판교 4성급 호텔 나인트리 바이 파르나스 판교 1박 호캉스 후기랍. Jw 메리어트 제주는 이번 평가에서 종합 점수 94. 4군의 인기 호텔, 펜션, 글램핑, 풀빌라, 모텔을 할인 특가로 예약하세요. 그럴때는 크게 고민하지말고 호치민의 17군 정도만 고려하는 것으로 상당수 고민을 줄일 수 있다.

메이데이 메이데이 메이데이 다시보기 20 Fusion original saigon centre 65 đ. 베트남 호치민은 전체적으로 물가가 저렴한 탓인지 호텔 숙박 비용도 크게 부담이 없어서 좋았습니다. 4성급 호텔의 평균 요금은 1박당 248,673원이며, 보다 고급스러운 숙박을 원하신다면 호찌민시 5성급. 10군의 4성급 호텔 르 사이공 그랜드 호텔 오크우드 레지던스 사이공 이비스 사이공 에어포트 소테츠 그랜드 프레사 사이공 럭셔리 랜드마크 81 어반 아파트먼트. 호치민 4성급 호텔, 가성비 좋은 에덴스타 사이공 호텔.

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.