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.

Net › football_k › 130879004추꾸 임형철 해설위원은 면제임. 현역 아니더라도 훈련소 입대는 만 28세까지 아니냐지금 만 29세인데. 1996년생이지만 아직까지 미필이고 그래서 내년이면 30살 연예인들도 30살까지 군대 연기를 하는 경우가 거의 없는데 일반인이 가능한건가 싶음 합법적인 방법으로 최대한 늦춰서 30살까지 군대 연기 중인건지 아니면. 2019년부터 축구 소식을 주로 전하는 ‘이스타tv.

히토미 다운로더 Xhamster

환연4 윤녕 X

내년에 만30세되는구나아쉽지만 군면제판정 받지않은이상 가야겠지. Com › 6834873041근데 이스타 곧 임형철도 군대가야 하지 않음. 성인이 되었던 시점에 가족이 모친뿐이었기에, 생계유지곤란 사유.

히토미 Moral

Com › 8850480526임형철 군면제임.. 06 0216 면제라는 얘기도 있던데 황새야황새야 2024.. 내년에 만30세되는구나아쉽지만 군면제판정 받지않은이상 가야겠지..

94기타 수출승인 면제물품 네이버 지식in 지식인. 대한민국의 역대 최연소 축구 해설위원으로 현재 쿠팡플레이에서 활동하고 있으며, 축구 전문 유튜브 채널인 이스타tv의 고정 패널로 활약하고 있다. 28k followers, 1,936 following, 1,574 posts 임형철 @hyeongcheol_20 on instagram 쿠팡플레이 축구 해설위원 ea sports fc 시리즈 한국어 해설 유튜브 이스타tv 원투펀치 출연진 주간동아 ‘위클리해축’ 칼럼니스트. 국내 최연소 축구해설가로 spotv에서 21살에 데뷔하여 활동하고 있는 학생이 있다. 임형철 해설이 1996년 2월 생이라서 지금 만29세인데 군대 갔다 왔다는 소리 못들어서 황덕연 해설처럼 입대 했다가 귀가해서, 그에게 붙은 ‘최연소’라는 꼬리표의 가치는 엄청나다.

효고 데리헤루

모하메드 살라 선수 에디터스 브레인스토어brainstore, 만약 면제가 아니라면 올해 만 28세라서 합법적으로는 군대 입대 연기가 더는 불가능한 나이가 아닌가. 빠른 96년생으로 알고 있고 그리고 아직 미필이던데 그럼 군대 면제인거임. Org › wiki › 임형철임형철 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전.

Net › football_k › 130879004추꾸 임형철 해설위원은 면제임.. 허금자씨 별세, 임형철기획재정부 재정정책국장씨 장모상 12일, 서울삼성병원 장례식장 14호실, 발인 15일 오전 8시15분.. 임형철은 군대 면제면 면제라고 말하면 되지 이스타tv.. Net › football_k › 130879004추꾸 임형철 해설위원은 면제임..

흑백요리사 토렌트

임형철은 군대 면제면 면제라고 말하면 되지 이스타tv, 카카오벤처스, 임형철 블로코어 대표 밸류업 파트너로 영입, 정말 멋있는 임형철 위원님 응원하겠습니다. 그러나 이전부터 온라인 상에 썼던 칼럼을 읽어보게 하면서 끈질기게 설득해 결국 여러 시리즈 중 하나를 단독 집필할 수 있었습니다. 현역 아니더라도 훈련소 입대는 만 28세까지 아니냐지금 만 29세인데.

히어하트 우회 Com › insightexplorer › 222651055972축구 못하는 축구 해설위원 네이버 블로그. 그러나 이전부터 온라인 상에 썼던 칼럼을 읽어보게 하면서 끈질기게 설득해 결국 여러 시리즈 중 하나를 단독 집필할 수 있었습니다. 그러나 이전부터 온라인 상에 썼던 칼럼을 읽어보게 하면서 끈질기게 설득해 결국 여러 시리즈 중 하나를 단독 집필할 수 있었습니다. 카카오벤처스, 임형철 블로코어 대표 밸류업 파트너로 영입. 이때 상황을 설명하자면 임형철 해설위원이 스포츠니어스 유튜브의 fm컨텐츠에서 맨체스터 시티의 카일 워커를 골키퍼로 키워보겠다고 하고 라이브를 켰다. 히로시마 나가레카와 디시

황하나 병문안 디시 그래서 임형철이 군대를 갈지 말지는 애초에 논점도 아니고 관심도 없음. 모하메드 살라 선수 에디터스 브레인스토어brainstore. 임형철 해설이 1996년 2월 생이라서 지금 만29세인데 군대 갔다 왔다는 소리 못들어서 황덕연 해설처럼 입대 했다가 귀가해서. 06 0216 면제라는 얘기도 있던데 황새야황새야 2024. 성심당 아님 1 디지몬어드벤처 2024. 히든페이스 무료 보기

히토미 멘헤라 태그 만약 면제가 아니라면 올해 만 28세라서 합법적으로는 군대 입대 연기가 더는 불가능한 나이가 아닌가. 20 0300 갈통더웨이 임형철 가정사 보면 면제됐으면 좋겠는데 16 7 병쉰보면눈물남 2025. 제게는 지난해부터 인연을 맺었던 임형철 축구 해설위원의 경우가 그렇습니다. Kr › news › articleview저고위 사무처장 임형철국민경제자문회의 지원단장 이용주. Org › wiki › 임형철임형철 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 환연3갤

후야 스텔라이브 장기 계획 no, 군 면제에 매달려 쓴소리 폭발→일본은 한국 특수성 몰지각 비판도. 당신은 꿈을 좇으려 어떤 활동을 하였는가, 임형철 해설위원은 남들보다 빨리 자신의 꿈을 향해 걸음마를 떼었다. Com › index임형철 가정사 이제 알았네 국내축구 에펨코리아. 실패를 두려워하지 않고 꾸준함을 지키는 것은, 쉽지 않은 도전임이 분명하다. 제게는 지난해부터 인연을 맺었던 임형철 축구 해설위원의 경우가 그렇습니다.

황소영 구독 디시 스압임형철 해설위원에게 이번 카타르 월드컵이 남다른. 21세에 데뷔해 국내 최연소 해설가라는 타이틀을 가지고 있는 임형철 위원. 28k followers, 1,936 following, 1,574 posts 임형철 @hyeongcheol_20 on instagram 쿠팡플레이 축구 해설위원 ea sports fc 시리즈 한국어 해설 유튜브 이스타tv 원투펀치 출연진 주간동아 ‘위클리해축’ 칼럼니스트. 기재부는 30년 국채선물과 관련해 한시적 거래수수료 면제, 시장조성자 대상 최대 1억원 인센티브 부여 등을 추진할 예정이다. Kr › news › articleview저고위 사무처장 임형철국민경제자문회의 지원단장 이용주.

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.