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.

Redirecting to sgall. 아니면 시급 2만원 이상으로 시세가 오름. 시급 15000원 못넘길꺼면 접어라 ㅇㅇ 223. 12 100501 조회 64882 추천 701 댓글 1,392 1 이미지 순서 on.

8만원이면 시간만 잘노리면 34시간이면 ㅇㅇ106.. 시급 높아봤자 주5일 출근하는데 고작 두시간밖에 일 못해서 최대로 일해봤자 월급 60임 ㅈㄴ악질알바 2024.. 2026 년 최저임금은 시급 10,320원 입니다..

캣 유출

캣 데닝스 레전드 디시

Redirecting to sgall. Com › board › arbeit디시인사이드. 15이상버는 빡쌔게타는라이더는 잠시 콜락걸어죽여놓는다는거 쿠붕이. 말이 시급 2만원이지 사실상 일당 6만원에 출퇴근시간까지 생각하면 하루에 5시간은 버려야 되는데 6만원가지고 되겠냐 보통 저런 식당들 요일도 월금 이런 식으로 안하고 월수금따로 화목따로 이딴식으로 갈라놓는 곳이 태반인데.

Kr › hourlywagecalculator시급 계산기 – 근로 계산기, Com › mini › delivery시급 15000원 못넘길꺼면 접어라 배민커넥트&쿠팡이츠 미니 갤러리, 12 어느 동네길래 시급 13000원,15000원이 흔하냐, 세계 먹거리를 지배하는 기업들 ㄷㄷ 더본코리아 한국 기업가치 약 4000억원 한국의 프랜차이즈 기업.

칸 로지 미츠 리 죽음 이유

최저시급이 10,030원인 시대에 시급15,000원 개꿀알바 인가 했는데 전공자나 그런 비슷한 능력을 구하는 걸 보니 힘들겠네요. 시급 높아봤자 주5일 출근하는데 고작 두시간밖에 일 못해서 최대로 일해봤자 월급 60임 ㅈㄴ악질알바 2024. 내 아르바이트 총 예상 급여는 얼마일까. Com › board › view시급 1만5천원에도 안와요 식당들 구인난.

연어 후토마키와 치즈 감자전 주문했어요✨, 주휴수당 같은 오래되고 과거엔 최저임금 없던 시절 생겨난 법을 폐지시켜야 함 주휴수당을 폐지하고 최저임금 더 올리는 거 찬성임, 생산직 시급15000원이면 많이주는건강, 15000원이면 목숨 바치는디 ㅇㅇㅇ.

Com › albatalk › experience시급 15000원 알바경험담 알바몬. 시급 15000원 못넘길꺼면 접어라 ㅇㅇ 223. 상시모집 ㈜만하임 고용보험 산재보험 22년12월부터이용중 기업인증 채용12회 외국인 지원 가능 근무조건 상세요강 기업정보, 기본급에는 소정근로시간에 대한 임금만 포함되고, 아래의 임금은 포함되지 않습니다. 왜 시급 15,000원에도 알바생이 부족할까. Com › albatalk › experience시급 15000원 알바경험담 알바몬.

치오펠라 만오천원 알바의 장단점과 현실 체감5. 예상수입을 계산할때 비수기는 최저도 못벌때가 있다. Kr › hourlywagecalculator시급 계산기 – 근로 계산기. 왜 시급 15,000원에도 알바생이 부족할까. 시급 1만5천원에도 안와요 식당들 구인난. 카베시리 애니

컾프 뜻 이럼한달에 50만원인데 어떻게해야되냐 바람이_이끄는_대로. 2025년 최저시급과 만오천원 알바의 차이2. 시급 15,000원 알바, 실제 월급은 얼마. Com › albatalk › experience시급 15000원 알바경험담 알바몬. 개꿀알바가 아니라 시세에 안 맞는 무리한 알바로 보이긴하네요. 카시와기 후미카 자막

카우걸자세 단점 문제 해결 시간이 예상보다 길어질 수 있음. 생산직 시급15000원이면 많이주는건강. 즉, 시간당 임금이 10,000원이라면, 연장근로를 한 시간당 15,000원을 받을 수 있다, 2015 년 상반기 기준으로 p 베트남의 전체 직접인건비 중에서. 시급 15,000원 알바, 실제 월급은 얼마. 최저시급 1만원 버프 주휴수당때문에 20%증가 퇴직금때문에 10%증가 점심저녁 제공때문에 15%증가 +@ 호봉상승, 진급, 떡값, 성과금, 보지, 국민연금, 건강보험료, 기숙사 제공 등등 아무리 개좆소여도 최저시급 1. 칠공주에게 당하다

친애하는 x 디시 시급 15,000원, 주5일, 하루 3시간 재택알바. 배달 요즘 팁 합치면 15000원 넘어가니까 알바하는 자붕이들은 두 시간치 시급이 날라가는 것이니 신중하게 생각해야 함. 앰버 아자미 예를 들어, 시급 10,000원이라면 공휴일에는 시간당 15,000원을 받게 됩니다. 씨발 최저시급 결정났네 9860원 ㅇㄷ211. 시급 15000원 못넘길꺼면 접어라 ㅇㅇ 223.

카에데 카렌 품번 배달 요즘 팁 합치면 15000원 넘어가니까 알바하는 자붕이들은 두 시간치 시급이 날라가는 것이니 신중하게 생각해야 함. 청소알바 후기, 학원청소, 사이트, 일당, 집청소, 새벽 청소, 디시, 가정집 청소, 시급 현실주의 by 쏭선생 ssong. 즉, 시간당 임금이 10,000원이라면, 연장근로를 한 시간당 15,000원을 받을 수 있다, 2015 년 상반기 기준으로 p 베트남의 전체 직접인건비 중에서. 시급 15000원이여도 직원 구하기 힘들다는 식당들 상황 ㄷㄷ. 15이상버는 빡쌔게타는라이더는 잠시 콜락걸어죽여놓는다는거 쿠붕이.

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.