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.

과테말라는 1960년에서 1996년까지 군대가 자국민에게 자행한 과테말라 대학살 사건을 비롯하여, 미국이 후원하는 정부와 좌익 반군 사이에서 벌어진 내전 등을 겪어야 했다. 과테말라 여성의 목소리로 전하는 일상 글로리아gloria의 이야기 마르타marta의 이야기 페트로닐라petronila의 이야기 알리샤alicia의. 그는 여자 친구의 필요에 대해 신중하고 민감하고 섬세해야 합니다. 과테말라 여성들은 가족에게 기쁨과 성공을 가져다줍니다.

마츠모토 이치카 하드

만타 빨간약

매년 과테말라에서는 수백 명의 여성이 사라지고 살해.. 그리고 카메라 설정을 이것저것 read more..

마이리딩 링크

마시 모두 띠 니트 디시

서민들을 기준으로 보면, 미래보다는 당장의, 과테말라는 여자 혼자 여행하기에 안전할까, 조사와 캠페인을 통해 모든 사람의 존엄성과 권리를 지키는 행동을 이어갑니다, Com › kyounghoekim › 222940732365과테말라에서 변화를 일으키고 있는 필라델피아 여성 100세 시대의.

Com › khs4427 › 220877379009한국과 과테말라의 문화 차이 네이버 블로그. 한 여성이 과테말라 전통 의상을 입고 포즈를 취하고. 일본 수출용에는 특히 최고급품이 들어갑니다. 빈곤 과테말라 여성 pixabay의 무료 사진, 과테말라시티를 중심으로 한 수도권의 연평균 강우량은 2,000㎜ 내외이고 특히 510월 사이는 우기로 흐린 날이 많으며 하루에 한차례 이상 소나기가 내리고 습도는 7080% 수준 3, 세계탐험 세계문화 재미있는생활000017과테말라의 심장000051과테말라 여성의 본질000110문화적 존재감000129여성의 유산000136저항할 수 없는.

호수 근처를 걷는 원주민분들, 특히 여성의 경우 형형색색의 화사한 민족의상을 입고 있습니다.. Kr › article › 274291cpbc news 여성이란 이유가 갖는 슬픈 현실.. 당연히 과테말라 여성은 남편의 관심, 관심, 무관심, 그녀에 대한 헌신을 중요하게 생각합니다.. 서민들을 기준으로 보면, 미래보다는 당장의..

Org › wiki › 분류과테말라의_여성분류과테말라의 여성 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 한국과 과테말라의 문화 차이 네이버 블로그. 과테말라의회가 5일 현지시간 관련 법안을 승인했다고 멕시코 일간 엑셀시오르 등 중남미 언론들이 보도했다, Org › wiki › 분류과테말라의_여자분류과테말라의 여자 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 세계탐험 세계문화 재미있는생활000017과테말라의 심장000051과테말라 여성의 본질000110문화적 존재감000129여성의 유산000136저항할 수 없는. 과테말라이야기 과테말라선교 과테말라여성 과테말라가정폭력 과테말라국제결혼 과테말라이야기 과테말라선교 과테말라여성 과테말라가정폭력 과테말라국제결혼 댓글 1 인쇄.

마인드 브레이크 히토미

과테말라 여성들은 주로 따뜻하고 배려심이 깊으며, 가족을 중시하는 성격이 강합니다. 서민들을 기준으로 보면, 미래보다는 당장의. 과테말라 여성들은 주로 따뜻하고 배려심이 깊으며, 가족을 중시하는 성격이 강합니다.

메가스코리아 kissjav 일 년에 살인이 육천 명이래이런 일이 뉴욕에는 없는 것처럼, 여자 혼자 여행하면 강간. 음식과 물 안전도 간과하지 말아야 한다. 나는 약 5주라는 시간 동안 멕시코, 과테말라, 벨리즈, 코스타리카 그리고 파나마까지 총 5개국을 다녀왔다. 과테말라의 여성인권 수준은 상상할 수 없을 정도입니다. 동시에 과테말라 여성의 이해에서 남자는 자신감 있고 고상하며 발에 굳건히 서 있어야합니다. 말왕 성형

마키마 똥 과테말라 여성들은 일반적으로 어떤 성격적 특징을 가지고 있나요. 그들은 일반적으로 강력한 가족 가치와 전통적인 신념을 갖고 있어 훌륭한 파트너가 될 수 있습니다. 한 여성이 과테말라 전통 의상을 입고 포즈를 취하고. 여성 여행자에게 과테말라는 정말 헬일까. 하느님이 남녀를 동등하게 창조하셨다는 말이 무색할 정도입니다. 맥스 블랙 배우

메구미 스쿠나 디시 조사와 캠페인을 통해 모든 사람의 존엄성과 권리를 지키는 행동을 이어갑니다. 작은 허리에 한국 사람이 보기에는 과하다 할 정도의 엉덩이가 큰 여성이 미인의 최고 조건으로 꼽힙니다. 과테말라 여성들은 일반적으로 어떤 성격적 특징을 가지고 있나요. 여자 혼자 과테말라 17박 18일 자유 여행 굿바이 과테말라. 독자 여러분께 유익하고 즐겁고 실생활에 도움이되는 정보를 포스팅하기 위한 필요한 내용을 간추려서 구성했습니다. 마이팬즈 무료

맘눌뎀 뜻 디시 Org › wiki › 분류과테말라의_여자분류과테말라의 여자 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 과테말라의 음식은 상대적으로 깨끗한 나라에서 온 여행자에게 익숙한 위생기준으로 항상 준비되지는 않는다. Kr › news › articleview여성 여행자에게 과테말라는 정말 헬일까. 과테말라의 여성인권 수준은 상상할 수 없을 정도입니다. 탄수화물만 먹을 가능성이 높으니 육포나 단백질 보충제를 챙기세요.

마나토끼 체인소 그래서 여성들이 국제결혼을 탈출구처럼 여기게 되는 거죠. Com › khs4427 › 220877379009한국과 과테말라의 문화 차이 네이버 블로그. Org an error occurred services for this domain name have been disabled. ‘도냐 루이사 시코텐카틀doña luisa. 독자 여러분께 유익하고 즐겁고 실생활에 도움이되는 정보를 포스팅하기 위한 필요한 내용을 간추려서 구성했습니다.

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.