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.

박세리 희망재단을 운영하고 있는 박세리는 최근 박세리의 부친이 박세리 희망재단의 명의를 도용해 사문서를 작성하고 계약을 체결한 사실이 알려졌다. 아니 그럼 박세리가 재산 다 날라간거임. 현재 그가 은퇴한지 꽤 시간이 흘렀기 때문에, 그의 당시 재산은 500억 정도의 가치를 지닌 것으로 추산되고 있습니다. 욕하지 말고 정말 몰라서 묻는건데 박세리 재산이 어느 정도야.

Sotwe 여장

한국 골프 역사상 가장 빛나는 이름, 바로 박세리입니다. 아니 그럼 박세리가 재산 다 날라간거임. 커리어내내 따지면 소렌스탐보다는 아랫급이었을건데. 그런데 imf때 돈을 번거라 건물 한 두어개 가지고 read more.

Sora Shiina Spankbang

욕하지 말고 정말 몰라서 묻는건데 박세리 재산이 어느 정도야. 박세리재산 박세리출연료 박세리연봉 박세리상금 박세리수입 박세리아파트 박세리오피스텔 박세리용산집 박세리용산아파트 박세리서울집 박세리대전집 박세리단독주택 박세리집 박세리재산 박세리출연료 박세리연봉 박세리상금 박세리수입. 하지만 박세리 측은 부친 고소에 대한 사실관계가 과대해석되고 억측이 이어져 기자회견을 열었다. Com › addlk1234 › 222754731233박세리 재산 출연료 연봉 집 아파트 건물 알아봐요 네이버 블로그.

Com › addlk1234 › 222754731233박세리 재산 출연료 연봉 집 아파트 건물 알아봐요 네이버 블로그, 박세리는 재산이 얼마일까 기타 국내 드라마 갤러리. 하지만 박세리 측은 부친 고소에 대한 사실관계가 과대해석되고 억측이 이어져 기자회견을 열었다.

오늘은 이렇게 박세리 재산 출연료 연봉등을 알아봤는데요, 🔥 단독 박세리 재산 총정리 골프로 번 수백억 vs 아버지 빚 30억, 법적 분쟁까지 골. 아니 그럼 박세리가 재산 다 날라간거임.

박세리 소속사 박세리의 소속사는 바즈인터내셔널, 이날 행사에는 이광희 sc제일은행장을 비롯한 sc, 또 박세리, 장윤정을 뽑았다 온라인 커뮤니티 디시인사이드. Com › addlk1234 › 222754731233박세리 재산 출연료 연봉 집 아파트 건물 알아봐요 네이버 블로그. 박세리 재산 얼마길래 200억 행방은. 리치언니 박세리 4억 고급 슈퍼카 스포츠카도 난 큰게 좋더라박세리 재산 재조명 원조교제 출산아동학대 7인의 탈출, 첫 주부터 방심.

Spankbang 디시

2020년 3월 18일부터 4월 28일까지 수미네 반찬에 박세리, 이상화와 함께 4기 신입생으로 출연하였으며 누나도 출연했다.. 박세리의 재산 박세리의 재산은 약 500억원으로 추정됩니다.. 박세리 희망재단을 운영하고 있는 박세리는 최근 박세리의 부친이 박세리 희망재단의 명의를 도용해 사문서를 작성하고 계약을 체결한 사실이 알려졌다.. 박세리 나이, 키, 고향, 학력 등을 간략하게 살펴보도록 하겠습니다..

Sotwe 여군

박세리 아버지 직업은 정확히 공개되지 않았다. 박세리 아버지 박준철 고소 이유 ft, 18 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용약관 개인정보, 3위 장윤정, 2위 박세리 누르고 가족과 손절해야 할 것 같은. 스포츠네 위상은 박찬호는 s급이라 보긴 어렵지만 4대 스포츠 중 인기팀 1, 2선발, 남자골프도 아니고 여자골프가 어느 정도인지는 모르겠네요.

골프의 여제로 불리는 박세리가 사업가로 제2의 인생을 살고 있는데요. 박세리 아빠 빚 100억 갚아줬는데 증여세가 50억이래, 박세리 프로필 나이, 재산, 결혼 등 대한민국 국민이라면 모두가 아는 lpga통산 25승이란 기록을 보유한 골프선수 박세리.

Spankbang Onlyfans Asian

박세리, 부친 고소 입장발표 기자회견, Kr › posts › 12774937박세리 재산 얼마길래 200억 행방은. 3위 장윤정, 2위 박세리 누르고 가족과 손절해야 할 것 같은.

sotwe 남친 걸크러쉬 유카 야덩 걸크러쉬 보미 비밀스토리. 광고 퀸김연아가 1400억이라는데 여기서 세금때고 비용때면 참고로 박세리 총상금이 1300만달라 밖에 안되요. 박세리 재산 얼마길래 200억 행방은. 전 골프이자 현 골프감독 박세리에 대해 알아보자. 현재 그가 은퇴한지 꽤 시간이 흘렀기 때문에, 그의 당시 재산은 500억 정도의 가치를 지닌 것으로 추산되고 있습니다. snos-005 emika

sotwe ㅅㅌㄹㅁ 박세리는 생각보다 없어 선수시절 광고 두개인가. 박세리 재산에 대한 네티즌들의 관심이 높아지고 있다. Com › soou232 › 223731018968박세리 나이, 결혼, 재산, 아버지 박준철까지. 그가 활동 시절 미국에서 대회 상금으로만 벌어들인 수익이 당시 140억 원이었고요. 박세리 아버지 직업은 정확히 공개되지 않았다. skyscanner 김포 제주 10월 24일 오전

sotwe 포경 2020년 3월 18일부터 4월 28일까지 수미네 반찬에 박세리, 이상화와 함께 4기 신입생으로 출연하였으며 누나도 출연했다. 오늘은 이렇게 박세리 재산 출연료 연봉등을 알아봤는데요. 그녀가 직접 밝힌 박세리 상금은 약, 200억이라고 합니다. 박세리, 부친 고소 입장발표 기자회견. 스포츠네 위상은 박찬호는 s급이라 보긴 어렵지만 4대 스포츠 중 인기팀 1, 2선발, 남자골프도 아니고 여자골프가 어느 정도인지는 모르겠네요. sone875

snos-003 자막 부동산 투자안했으면 어차피 무지해서 안했겟지만 추정재산 900억 언더임여기서 600억가량을 아버지 빚갚는데 썻다는거 오피셜 떳고 새만금 투자건이랑 안알려진거 합하면 100200억정도 더썼을수도 있음. 박세리는 재산이 얼마일까 기타 국내 드라마 갤러리. 박세리재산 박세리출연료 박세리연봉 박세리상금 박세리수입 박세리아파트 박세리오피스텔 박세리용산집 박세리용산아파트 박세리서울집 박세리대전집 박세리단독주택 박세리집 박세리재산 박세리출연료 박세리연봉 박세리상금 박세리수입. 상금이야 백억이 넘는데 스폰 비용이 그 몇배일거여서 수백억 까지는 이해 하겠음. 박세리, 부친 고소 입장발표 기자회견.

sotwe av sensei 욕하지 말고 정말 몰라서 묻는건데 박세리 재산이 어느 정도야. 양주사는 98년생 박세리 필독 세리 마이너 갤러리. 박세리 사진연합뉴스 사문서위조 혐의로 부친을 고소한 박세리 박세리희망재단 이사장이 증여세 폭탄을 맞을 수도 있다는 전망이 나왔다. 박세리 재산 얼마길래 200억 행방은. 박세리 재산 출연료 연봉 집 아파트 건물 알아봐요.

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.