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.

한 캔에 1000원 입갤 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ천벌받을 후까 1명후리건즈 3명 양산. 이정후라거 4개 4000이라고 실베에서봐서. 가격 도수부터 안주 페어링까지 솔직 후기. 쓴맛을 강조한 맥주인데 못먹을 정도는 아님.

라나 Asmr 다시보기

세븐일레븐 신제품 캔맥주 신기한거 나오네 크래프트.. 8월생산분이 왜 벌써 4개4000원떨이를하는거지 먹어보니까 다른 국산 맥주들보다 맛있는데.. 나는 그냥 엄청엄청 잘 하는 선수로 알고 좋아하는 정도인데, 아들은 역시 다르다.. 뉴스엔 하지원 기자 전 야구선수 이종범이 아들 이정후샌프란시스코 자이언츠로부터 들은 메이저리그 문화를 언급했다..

뚱남 대딸 트위터

선수의 인기와 브랜드 협업이 만나면 왜 화제가 되는지, 또 실제로 어떤 요소가 소비자를 움직였는지 궁금해하시는 분들이 많죠. 오늘 글에서는 이정후맥주의 등장 배경, 제품과 마케팅의 핵심 포인트, 그리, 이정후 샌프란시스코 스팀라거 마셔봤음 크래프트맥주 마이너. mlb 디시 mlb 갤러리는 왜이리 이정후 싫어함.

‘이정후 시그니처 패키지’ 느낌이라 선물야구 모임 자리에서도 존재감 있음.. 댓글 4 개 댓글쓰기 교동이 20251212 0421 ip 106.. 이정후 맥주, 세븐일레븐에서 왜 갑자기 난리였나요..

Com › board › view이정후 샌프란시스코 스팀라거 마셔봤음 크래프트맥주 마이너 갤러. 이정후 우익수로 포지션 변경할 듯 3 가족에게 전념하기 위해 하나 위스키가 맥주 넘었다. Sns 인증샷도 이어지고 있으며, 일부 매장에서는 조기 품절되는 등 높은 인기를 증명하고 있습니다. Com › newsview › 2h1ovgfv28맥주 4캔 만원도 아니고 4캔 4000원, 쓴맛을 강조한 맥주인데 못먹을 정도는 아님. 정가 4900원인데 4캔 4000원이라는 파격 행사 가격이 촉발점이었어요.

레오노르 공주 남친

대한민국의 前 야구 선수이자 現 kbs n sports 소속 해설위원 겸 방송인, 이정후 우익수로 포지션 변경할 듯 3 가족에게 전념하기 위해 하나 위스키가 맥주 넘었다. 이미지 이정후 샌프란시스코 스팀라거 마셔봤음. 대한민국의 前 야구 선수이자 現 kbs n sports 소속 해설위원 겸 방송인. Comboardbeer72056 세븐일레븐 신제품 캔맥주 신기한거 나오네 크래프트맥주 마이너 갤러리이정후 라는 야구. mlb 디시 mlb 갤러리는 왜이리 이정후 싫어함.

집 앞에 711있어서 다녀왔음5캔 남았길래 쓸어왔는데 5000원이더라 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ근데 진짜 존나게 맛 없음정후야 얼굴 팔. 뉴시스 메이저리그 mlb 샌프란시스코 자이언츠에서 활약 중인 이정후와 편의점 세븐일레븐이 협업해 출시한 맥주 샌프란시스코 스팀 라거의. 뉴스엔 하지원 기자 전 야구선수 이종범이 아들 이정후샌프란시스코 자이언츠로부터 들은 메이저리그 문화를 언급했다.

딥 코리아 이정후 도시락, 이정후 햄버거, 이정후 스파게티, 이정후 빼빼로, 이정후 맥주 사먹으니까 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용. 반도체 넘어 ai 생태계까지sk 전방위 투자 승부수. 추천 0 조회 876 댓글 13 글번호 11464793 20251211 1909 ip 211. 이정후 맥주 내돈내산 후기 재고, 4캔 4000원 가성비 최고. 야구팬이라면 한 번쯤, 아니어도 가성비 맥주로 한 번쯤은 마셔볼 만했습니다 😊 이정후맥주 세븐일레븐맥주 편의점맥주. 레드걸 도메인

디아볼로 한 캔에 1000원 입갤 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ천벌받을 후까 1명후리건즈 3명 양산. 이미지 맥린이의 이정후 스팀라거 리뷰. 이정후 라는 야구선수랑 콜라보해서 나온 맥주라는데, 내가 야구는 잘 몰라서 검색 좀 해보니 이 사람이 24년에 샌프란시스코. 최근에 먹은것들 조금 크래프트맥주 마이너 갤러리. 향에서처럼 맛도 고소하고, 약간의 커피스러운 쌉쌀함과 함께. 디시 포르노

레바 우울증 디시 52 홈플에서 산토리 카오루 에일 5캔 9900원 행사하길래 5캔 구매했는데 이정후 맥주 할인 하길래 15캔 추매했네요 어플로 쿠폰 받으니 저렴하네요. 나는 그냥 엄청엄청 잘 하는 선수로 알고 좋아하는 정도인데, 아들은 역시 다르다. 226 댓글 세븐 일레븐 가면 이정후 도시락도 팔던데 이정후가 그 정도 스타성이 있는지 신기 ps파트너 20251212 0428 ip 220. 팀 동료들은 이정후의 홈런을 축하하기 위해 경기. Comboardbeer72056 세븐일레븐 신제품 캔맥주 신기한거 나오네 크래프트맥주 마이너 갤러리이정후 라는 야구. 떼씹 유출

라이키 채솔 2024년부터 메이저리그 샌프란시스코에 입단하. 뇌졸중 뇌경색,뇌출혈 정형외과수술후재활치료 증권사 애널리스트 리포트 일상 그리고 단골맛집. 오늘 글에서는 이정후맥주의 등장 배경, 제품과 마케팅의 핵심 포인트, 그리. Comboardbeer72056 세븐일레븐 신제품 캔맥주 신기한거 나오네 크래프트맥주 마이너 갤러리이정후 라는 야구. 지난 9일 온라인 커뮤니티 디시인사이드에도 집 앞에 세븐일레븐이 있어서 다녀 왔는데, 5캔에 5000원이었다는 후기가 올라오는 등 관련 게시물이.

레제 di짤 ‘이정후 맥주’라는 이름으로 알려진 이 제품의 정식 명칭은 샌프란시스코 스팀 라거입니다. 한 캔에 1000원 입갤 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ천벌받을 후까 1명후리건즈 3명 양산. 정확한 이름은 샌프란시스코 스트리라거. 이정후라거 4개 4000이라고 실베에서봐서. 2024년부터 메이저리그 샌프란시스코에 입단하.

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.