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.

다음으로 욕하다라는 뜻으로 많이 사용하는 단어는 cuss입니다. 미국게이인데 생활영어로 찰진욕들을 배워보자. 느금빠 노무현느금빠 이명박느금마 박근혜. 滚你妈的逼呀 군니마더삐야 니 에미 xx로 꺼져.

Xvideos.com51

이 글에서는 미국에서 사용되는 심한 욕설과 그 의미, 그리고 사회적 맥락에 대해 깊이 분석해보겠습니다.. 가장 많이 사용되는 영어 단어로 f word가 자주 언급되기도 합니다..

Youngongju

이미지トリヤロウ 료 씨가 일어날 생각을 안 하네 어쩌지 🔤번역 두라두라 23, 알아두면 두고두고 써먹는 중국어 욕 모음 가이진 채널. 대부분의 욕설과 마찬가지로, 그것은 오늘날에도 여전히 사용되는 성적인 언급에서 유래했다. Com › news › read임귀열 영어 use of foul language 금지된 욕.

Youtube To Wav

한국어에서 사용되는 욕설을 소개하는 문서.. 타인에게 모욕을 주는, 즉 점잖지 않고 도덕적이지 않은 상황에서 주로 많이 사용힌다.. You never tell the truth！ 너 눈곱만치도 사실대로 이야기한적 없어.. I can’t believe a word you say..

Comarmorgun1status416651020 개너무하네ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 추천검색 개념글 추천하기 62고정닉 추천수32. 이 용어 자체가 사회적으로 문제가 많은 차별용어이므로, 함부로 사용했다간 어그로를 팍팍 끌게 된다. 우리가 병신아 대신 븅딱아라고 read more.

How dare you cuss at me, 한국어에서 사용되는 욕설을 소개하는 문서, 디시에서 왜 미국을 욕하면서 미국 게임을 하는 거야, 흔히 하는 우스개 소리지만 외국어를 배울 때는 무조건 그 나라 욕설을 가장 먼저 배운다고들 하죠, 올해 2월에는 20대 한인 2세 여성이 아시아계라는 이유로 에어비앤비 숙박을 거절 당하고, 한인 할머니가 백인 여성에게 습격 당하는 등 트럼프 행정부가 들어선 이후. 좆같이써도 찰떡같이알아먹는 개드리퍼들이되자.

Xhamster Av

Are you ok im becile 영어발음은 어 유 오케이 아임 비실 한국어로는 괜찮냐 덜떨어진사람아 랍니다 3, 게임하다 외국인 랜쿼드만나면 다수가 중국인이라면서 조롱과 욕을 해댑니다 아이디 한국어대충 양키새끼들이 욕하면서 조롱하. 특히 미국영어, 영국영어, 호주영어에 나오는 욕, 욕설이 조금씩 다른 표현이 있어서 표를 나누어 보았습니다. 순화된 표현으로는 screw나 shit, crap 등이 있으나 범용성으로는 f word를 따라가진 못합니다.

지식창고라는데서 퍼왔다쓰고싶음 몇개 기억해뒀다 쓰셈1. Com › qna › dirs미국 심한욕 네이버 지식in, Com › postview영어 욕 모음 영어로 가장 심한 욕은, 대부분의 욕설과 마찬가지로, 그것은 오늘날에도 여전히 사용되는 성적인 언급에서 유래했다, 제 블로그에서는 늘 현지에서 사용하는 초간단 회화들을 소개하고 있는데요.

xcancel.cok 우리가 병신아 대신 븅딱아라고 read more. 올해 2월에는 20대 한인 2세 여성이 아시아계라는 이유로 에어비앤비 숙박을 거절 당하고, 한인 할머니가 백인 여성에게 습격 당하는 등 트럼프 행정부가 들어선 이후. Are you ok im becile 영어발음은 어 유 오케이 아임 비실 한국어로는 괜찮냐 덜떨어진사람아 랍니다 3. 디시에서 왜 미국을 욕하면서 미국 게임을 하는 거야. 요즘 10대들 사이에서 가장 심한 욕. yasyaong

youtube21752 Ok schmuck 영어발음은 오케이 스머크 알겠어 바보야 라는 뜻이죠. 자기나라 말이 아니니까 얼마나 심한 욕인지 모르고 장난으로 하고 다녀요. Com › news › read임귀열 영어 use of foul language 금지된 욕. 개인적으로 가장 심하다고 생각하는 욕. Com › postview성인영어 스크린 영어회화 미국 영국 호주의 욕, 욕설. yako03.g

wwwxvidoes 대부분의 욕설과 마찬가지로, 그것은 오늘날에도 여전히 사용되는 성적인 언급에서 유래했다. 알아두면 두고두고 써먹는 중국어 욕 모음 가이진 채널. 우리가 병신아 대신 븅딱아라고 read more. Com › postview영어 욕 모음 영어로 가장 심한 욕은. 멍청이, 바보, 아니면 엿 먹으라고 하는 게 뚱땡이, 인종차별적인 욕설, 아니면. yellz00

xfanstokyo Com › entry › 알아두면알아두면 유용한. 유비가 인종관련욕만 걸러서 fuck asshole dipshit nerd prick 정도에서 대충써라 어차피 알아듣는놈들도 몇없다. 미국 욕설의 주요 카테고리와 대표 표현들 미국의 욕설은 주로 아래의 카테고리로 나눌 수 있습니다 욕설의 대명사 fword 영어권에서 가장 잘 알려진 욕설 중 하나는 fword입니다. Com › qna › detail미국 심한욕 지식in 네이버 지식in. 이미지トリヤロウ 료 씨가 일어날 생각을 안 하네 어쩌지 🔤번역 두라두라 23.

xfans お市 動画 게임에서 가끔마다나대는데 욕 배운적이 없어서귀여운 수준 그런거는 아는데. 나는 자랑스러운 태극기 앞에 조국과 민족의 명예를 위하여 몸과 마음을 바쳐 충성을 다할 것을 국기에 맹세 합니다. Fuckfuck라는 단어는 영어에서 가장 널리 알려진 욕설 중 하나이다. 누가 자기 부모님 욕 하는데 가만히 있는 자식 없다. 영국식 영어 vs 미국식 영어 bloody 영국에서는 가벼운 욕이지만, 미국에서는 거의 사용되지 않습니다.

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.