호감 가는 남자 앞에선, 일부러 관심 없는 척하며 ‘밀당’을 하기도 한다.

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.

보통 여자들 사이에서는 어릴 때부터 친구의 긴 머리카락을 만지는 것이 익숙하고 자연스러운 일일 것이다. ㅋ 나 여자임 여자들 머리만지는거 싫어하는 이유는. 근데 별로 안이쁜 애들이 자주 그러는데 정신불안이야. Com › entry › 머리만지는머리 만지는 여자 심리 무의식적 신호와 감정의 표현.

여자가 머리를 만지는 심리 단순한 행동 뒤에 숨겨진 복잡한 메시지여자가 머리를 만지는 행동은 단순히 머리카락을 정리하는 것 이상의 의미를 지닙니다.

남자 반삭 후 머리, 남자 반삭후 머리 기르는 과정.

그러나 1시간 동안 머리만 만지는 습관을 가진 여자는 거의 없을 것이다.. 소개팅이며 거의 초면에 본 상대들 정수리 머리 만지는거 뭔데 이유가..

머리 돌돌말때 느낌좋아서 그러는거 2.

699 21 여자가 머리 계속 쓸어넘기면 남자들은 정말 본인한테 관심있어서 그러는거라 생각해.

62 ㄹㅇㅋㅋ 더워서 머리 넘길때도 있고 간지러워서 만질때도 있고 이유는 다양함ㅋㅋ 2023.. 사람은 무의식적으로 머리를 만짐으로써 자신의 심리 상태를 드러내기도 한다.. 한번씩 머리 할 때마다 미용실가서 가르마 타면 주위에서 그렇게 좀 하고 다니라고 이야기 많이 듣거든 근데 한두번 해보다가 아침에 시간도 너무 잡아먹고 시간 들여서 했는데 제대로 했는지도 모르겠고 해서 그냥 포기함.. 699 21 여자가 머리 계속 쓸어넘기면 남자들은 정말 본인한테 관심있어서 그러는거라 생각해..

예를 들어, 누군가와 대화할 때 머리를 만지는 행동은 긴장감을 느끼고 있다는 증거일 수 있다, 129 머리 빙빙꼬는건 머리 망가뜨리는거니까 너같은 개씹존못들앞에서나 하는 거임 길이나 버스, 강의실에서 여자들 눈 마주치거나 근처 지나갈 때 폰 보면서 머리 정리하는거는 전혀 다른거다 게이야 2022. 감정 표현 머리를 만지는 행동은 감정을 표현하는 하나의 방법일 수 있습니다. 감정 표현 머리를 만지는 행동은 감정을 표현하는 하나의 방법일 수 있습니다. 이 행동은 긴장감을 풀거나 안정감을 찾기 위한 무의식적 신호일 수 있다, 이 행동은 긴장감을 풀거나 안정감을 찾기 위한 무의식적 신호일 수 있다.

네토 아내 머리 돌돌말때 느낌좋아서 그러는거 2. 버튜버 너희들 아직도 아이리스 굿즈를 사지않았다고. 62 ㄹㅇㅋㅋ 더워서 머리 넘길때도 있고 간지러워서 만질때도 있고 이유는 다양함ㅋㅋ 2023. 또한, 머리를 만지는 것은 자신감이나 불안함을 나타내는 방법이기도 하다. 이러한 행동을 통해 여성은 자신의 감정을 표현하고, 상대방과의 관계를 발전시키려는 의도를 나타낼 수 있습니다. 노무현 av

노도강 멤버 호감 가는 남자 앞에선, 일부러 관심 없는 척하며 ‘밀당’을 하기도 한다. 남자들 여자 머리 넘기는거 의미부여 심하구낭 짝사랑. 여자가 남자한테 관심 있으면 머리 만지는 거 맞음 짝사랑. 그러나 1시간 동안 머리만 만지는 습관을 가진 여자는 거의 없을 것이다. 234 나는혼자있을때도 머리 많이만지는데 이걸 착각하는사람이 있다는게 ㅈㄴ신기함 2023. 남친급습녀 av19

네토나래 군인 699 21 여자가 머리 계속 쓸어넘기면 남자들은 정말 본인한테 관심있어서 그러는거라 생각해. 남자들은 조금 대담하게 가야 관심 표현되지 않나. Com › board › view머리호감설 확실히 규명한다. 머리 만지는 행동의 의미 머리를 만지는 행동은 다양한 신호와 감정을 표현하는 복합적인 의미를 내포하고 있다. Com › board › view여자가 남자한테 성적 호감 있는지 알아보는 법 실시간 베스트 갤러. 남궁혁 빨간약 디시

냥붑 中文 평소에 머리 하나도 안 만지는 년이 갑자기 여자인 척하는 거 보. 여성이 머리를 만지는 이유는 상황과 개인의 성격에 따라 다양하게 해석될 수 있습니다. 기동신세기 건담x의 티파 아딜이라는 캐릭터에 대해 알아. 더 확실한 신호는 머리카락을 가지고 노는 거지, 손가락에 막 감는 것처럼. 미 연예 매체 엘리트 데일리, 코스모폴리탄지.

노개팅 예로 내가 길거리나 버스를 타면 주위 여자들의 10에 8은 분주히 자기 머리를 만진다. +추가 다시 정리한다 잘생긴남자 지나갈때 여자 반응들. 평소에 머리 하나도 안 만지는 년이 갑자기 여자인 척하는 거 보니까 역겹더라. 195 여자머리 만지는 꿀팁 준다 손바닥이 아니라 손등으로 결을 따라 스치듯 만지는거다 항상 미묘한 거리감이 호기심과 흥분을 유발한다 물론 머리를 만졌다고 보지를 벌리는 미친년은 없으니 개지랄하지말고 2023. 여자가 남자한테 관심 있으면 머리 만지는 거 맞음 짝사랑.

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.