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.

こくまるカレー 진짜 가격대비 맛있음공동2. 카레에 어울리는 사이드 디시나 곁들임 음식은 무엇인가요. 볼갤요리대회 맛있는 비프카레 만들어봤어요. 이 사진은 본인이 직접 46ma에서 먹은 치킨커리로 이때 첫 토마토 베이스의 일본카레를 먹었는데 매우 충격이었다.

이연우 미공개 화보

이지각 남친 디시

카레 칼로리와 다이어트 관련 정보가 공유되는 디시인사이드 게시글입니다.. 일본회사 제품이어도 바몬드 카레 같은건 원댓글 작성자가 생각하는 맛이랑 다름..

이예빈 치어리더 디시

토로케루 고체 카레로 맛있는 카레 만들기. 가격 4500엔 시푸드 카레1982년에 오픈한 이 가게는 일본식이 아닌 유럽풍 카레 전문점으로 글쓰는 기준 4. 버터넣으면 좋은데 버터가없음ㅠ 그리고 야채랑 카레가루 세팅 고기가 익으면 중불에 양파같이 볶기 양파 익히는동안 감자랑 당근썰기 양파 대강 카라멜라이징되면 감자, 질리질 않네 여기에 야채 때려박으면 그냥저냥 다 먹을만하고닭가슴살도 넣어먹으면 오히려 맛있고가격도 쌈 라면 끓이는 느낌이라 준비하는것도 덜 귀찮고, 이번달에 식비 엄청 아꼈다고맙다 dc official app.

이응경유출

그리고 다음 순위로 감자와 돼지고기이고 당근은 안 넣어도 되고, 일본회사 제품이어도 바몬드 카레 같은건 원댓글 작성자가 생각하는 맛이랑 다름, 버터넣으면 좋은데 버터가없음ㅠ 그리고 야채랑 카레가루 세팅 고기가 익으면 중불에 양파같이 볶기 양파 익히는동안 감자랑 당근썰기 양파 대강 카라멜라이징되면 감자. 자취중인데 건강은 스스로 챙겨야 된다고 생각해서 평생 먹을 음식중 하나로 토마토카레를 선택했음.

이예빈 ㄲㅈ

일본카레 쉽게 만드는 법, 집에서 일본카레 만들기, 일본식 카레 레시피, 맛있는 일본 카레 요리, 골든커리 활용. 1년정도 먹고있는데 일단 재료는 토마토, 이는 시판 카레 분말은 가정에서의 조리 편의성을 위해 향신료 외에 과일퓨레나 전분 등이 추가로 혼합해 판매하기 때문이다. 그리고 이를 쌀밥과 함께 요리해 먹을 경우 카레라이스라고 부르거나 그냥 카레라고도 부른다.

이영지 erome → ok, 닭가슴살야채만 넣어도 맛있다 반응 다수. 자취중인데 건강은 스스로 챙겨야 된다고 생각해서 평생 먹을 음식중 하나로 토마토카레를 선택했음. S&b 카레가루 위링크만으로도 단순하게 재료 코팅하는 정도의 카레를 만들 수 있지만 일본식 카레 디너카레는 아닙니다. Com › best › 8150447935디시펌 더본코리아 카레 성분. 시판 카레 분말이나 레토르트에는 마살라 비중이 10% 이하이고, 밀가루와 우지 등을 비롯한 유지가 80% 이상을 차지한다. 이소윤 물금고

이헨 주소 왠지 인도 이문대하면 생각날법한 카레도 안나왔고어차피 공휴일이래 봐야 만날 여친도 없는 좆아싸새끼라따로 할 짓도 없으니 카레를 만들어 보기로 했다재료카레가루, 소고기 등심 500g 이상 척아이롤이면 손질시 무게가 많. 토로케루 고체 카레로 맛있는 카레 만들기. 동원 라이트스탠다드 참치 85g 5캔 + 카레참치 90g 5캔 003799766. ㅎㅎ 편의성에서 큰 차이가 발생합니다. 신주쿠나 시부야 같은 대형 번화가에서 추천해줬으면 좋겠다 3. 이시다 아키라 논란

이지영 미드 싱글벙글 반박불가 한국이 절때 못잡는 일본 제품 weekend_whip 2025. 카레 레시피 카레 맛있게 만드는 법 대용량 카레 만들기 네이버 블로그 ♥요리레시피♥ 237개의 글 목록열기. 커서도 직접만들어먹거나 외식메뉴로 선택하진 않아서 잘 몰랐네. 흰쌀밥, 현미밥 또는 향신료가 첨가된 필라프 등이 카레와 잘 어울립니다. 싱글벙글 반박불가 한국이 절때 못잡는 일본 제품 weekend_whip 2025. 이파니 야동

이연우 맥심 미공개화보 이 과정을 캐러멜라이징이라고 부릅니다. 자취중인데 건강은 스스로 챙겨야 된다고 생각해서 평생 먹을 음식중 하나로 토마토카레를 선택했음. 왠만한 3분카레보다 맛잇는거야 기본이고. 초간단요리 야채재료 감자5, 고구마3, 양파8, 카레용 돼지고기200g 미만, 조미료 소금2스푼, 카레가루 1봉지 물 6컵 250ml x 6. 오뚜기 카레 매운맛 혹은 뭐 아무거나 그때그때 가장 저렴한 분말카레 + 오뚜기 하이라이스 분말 11로 섞어씁니다.

이예빈 딥페이크 Net › service › boards&b 디너커리를 대체할 카레 제품을 찾고있습니다 클리앙. 초간단요리 야채재료 감자5, 고구마3, 양파8, 카레용 돼지고기200g 미만, 조미료 소금2스푼, 카레가루 1봉지 물 6컵 250ml x 6. 신주쿠나 시부야 같은 대형 번화가에서 추천해줬으면 좋겠다 3. 전 백세카레 고형 매운맛, 약간매운맛이 좋더군요. 그리고 다음 순위로 감자와 돼지고기이고 당근은 안 넣어도 되고.

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.