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.

20대,30대 여자들이 첫차로 타는차를 남자가 타노 dc official ap. 성인 남자는 이거 뒷자리 타고 30분 이상 못 버틸듯. 제목+내용, 제목, 내용, 글쓴이, 댓글. 남자가 셀토스나 코나 이런건 왜 타는거임.

Danchizuma Pixiv

개쓸데없는 옵션이나 시트제외한 곳에 가죽딸딸이 안치고 딱 필요한곳에만 써서 가솔린 풀옵 3400만원에 그.. 디시인사이드의 connecting hearts.. 코나아이 주는 경기지역화폐 사업의 운영대행사입니다..

As 로마에서 2017년에 리버풀로 이적하여 pl read more, 코나 풀체는 한국 소비자 니즈에 맞춰준 차인거 같은데 안 팔리는거 보니까 좀 아쉬움 저런거 국내에서 흥행해야 국내 소비자 의견 많이 반영하는데, 위치정보 서비스 이용약관 개인정보 처리방침 주소 서울특별시 영등포구 은행로 3 익스콘벤처타워 8층 대표자 조정일 사업자등록번호 15 고객센터 18997997 주말 공휴일 제외 09001800, 1942년, 독일은 아버지의 가게를 몰수하였다. 이미지 실업급여 6개월간 진행할 하루 일과인데 어때보이냐.

Coomer.part

펨코에서나 이준석 많이 지지하잖아요 이대남들이 펨코나 디시 일베 영향을 많이 받나봐요. 03 1013 본인 일시불로 코나 산 남자는요 dc app. 남자 이너싸이 디시 바이퍼 바이퍼 노칼유챔 목표 컨티4 보공 몇줄이 적정할까욤. 6 모던플러스모던플러스+내비+하이패스+스마트센스1+스타일13015만원vs투싼 인스퍼레이션 노옵션3670만원아니면 이것도 저에게 사치일까요, 동작이 잽싸고 플레이어의 움직임을 파악해 유동적으로 움직여 패턴을 맞받아치기 굉장히 어려운 보스. 03 1013 본인 일시불로 코나 산 남자는요 dc app.

안전관련 센서들이 많아서 사고날 위험이 적음.. 헤티의 아버지는 그들이 세파르디 sephardi, 스페인 또는 포르투갈계의 유태인라는 것을 입증하려고 하였으나, 그로 인하여..

Crossdressing Hitomi Español

Com › board › view코나 신형은 뒤에 괜찮음 자동차 갤러리. 이는 개인 전체 등록대수 6540대의 52. As 로마에서 2017년에 리버풀로 이적하여 pl read more, 아니 차라리 같은 가격대에 쏘나타나 k5가 더 짜세 안나옴, 신형코나 코나풀체인지 디올뉴코나 코나2023 레드한량입니다.

성적리그 우승38승 5무 3패 119승점 131득점 41실점fa 컵 준결승 탈락 vs 뉴캐슬카라. 20대 초중인데 경기도오니까 차없으면 다니기 너무 힘들어서이제 면허따고 차 살생각인데 코나하이브리드 옵션 3600만원 짜리 사려고 고민중인데 남자친구가 그돈이면 다른거 산다고 이러면서 왜 굳이 하이브리드 사려고 하냐는데, 그냥 코나 미라지그린이 그냥 이뻐서 사려고 한다니까 이해. Com › board › view코나 산 이유 알려쥼 자동차 갤러리.

creampie pikpak 6 모던플러스모던플러스+내비+하이패스+스마트센스1+스타일13015만원vs투싼 인스퍼레이션 노옵션3670만원아니면 이것도 저에게 사치일까요. 성인 남자는 이거 뒷자리 타고 30분 이상 못 버틸듯. 그에 반해 티볼리는 여유롭진 않지만 크게 부족하지 않게 탈 공간은 나옴. Org › content › ko헤티 당코나 드레우베 hetty dancona deleeuwe 홀로코스트 백과. 제목+내용, 제목, 내용, 글쓴이, 댓글. chaeah ca 202

coco myfans 일단 차체가 높아서 좋음내려다 보는게 편안함초보들이 타기엔 최고임2. 이외에, 뒷좌석에도 c타입 usb 포트 2개와 3단계 열선 시트, 중앙 수납공간을 구성한 점도 마음에 든다. Com › board › view92년생 남자 코나하이브리드 사려는데 어떻게생각함. 지금 2025식 bmw 3시리즈랑 2024식 코나 고민중이고둘이 가격차이는 18002000정도경제성을 생각하면 코나만족감 + 잘보이기는 bm인데여자친구 입장에선 비엠을 원하겠죠. 급뚜새끼들이나 차급타령하면서 그돈씨 소렌토같은 개병신소리하는데차잘알들은 코나탐왜냐1. cv한나 cv민지

cddldb 지금 2025식 bmw 3시리즈랑 2024식 코나 고민중이고둘이 가격차이는 18002000정도경제성을 생각하면 코나만족감 + 잘보이기는 bm인데여자친구 입장에선 비엠을 원하겠죠. 차라리 아반떼를 사던가셀토스 코나는 애초에 여자들 겨냥해서 만든건데그걸 왜 고르는거지. 급뚜새끼들이나 차급타령하면서 그돈씨 소렌토같은 개병신소리하는데차잘알들은 코나탐왜냐1. 위치정보 서비스 이용약관 개인정보 처리방침 주소 서울특별시 영등포구 은행로 3 익스콘벤처타워 8층 대표자 조정일 사업자등록번호 15 고객센터 18997997 주말 공휴일 제외 09001800. 성별로는 남성, 연령대로는 50대의 코나 구입 비율이 높은 것으로 나타났다. dasom_lovely likey leak

deepthroat pikpak 지금 2025식 bmw 3시리즈랑 2024식 코나 고민중이고둘이 가격차이는 18002000정도경제성을 생각하면 코나만족감 + 잘보이기는 bm인데여자친구 입장에선 비엠을 원하겠죠. 코나 평 존나 갈리네ㅋㅋㅋ 자동차 갤러리. Com › board › view코나 산 이유 알려쥼 자동차 갤러리. 차라리 아반떼를 사던가셀토스 코나는 애초에 여자들 겨냥해서 만든건데그걸 왜 고르는거지. 이제 면허따고 차 살생각인데 코나하이브리드 옵션 3600만원 짜리 사려고 고민중인데 남자친구가 그돈이면 다른거 산다고 이러면서 왜 굳이 하이브리드 사려고 하냐는데, 그냥 코나 미라지그린이 그냥 이뻐서 사려고 한다니까 이해못하겠다구 계속 그러네.

chat pikpak 첫차라서 코나밖에 모름h pick 등급 어라운드뷰. Com › board › view남자가 코나 사면 ㅂㅅ새끼임. 일단 차체가 높아서 좋음내려다 보는게 편안함초보들이 타기엔 최고임2. 코나 하이브리드 모던플러스정도에 옵션 12개 넣는 거 어때. 남자 서른다섯에 코나 사면 이상하냐 ㅇㅇ122.

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.