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.

Com › entertainments › broadcast신민아, 전남친들과 헤어진 이유양다리는 손가락 욕→비속어 응징. 남민아 남친, 창민 전남친, 강민아 남자친구. 신민아 전남친을 봐 신민아 남자 취향 소나무야 기타 국내. 김원중 신민아 2008년 영화 무림 여대생에서 신민아는 주연으로 활약합니다.

체인소맨hentai

남친한테 하면 좋은 아재개그, 남친여친한테 하기좋은 아재개그.. 전지현 다음으로 사귄게 신민아고 탑 사귀기전.. 김은숙 작가의 신작 넷플릭스 다 이루어질지니’에.. 남친한테 하면 좋은 아재개그, 남친여친한테 하기좋은 아재개그..

스킨푸드 자몽주가 바로 그 주인공인데, 신민아 네일 저렴이로 불리며 대란이 일어났다, 2 광고나 화보에서 더욱 read more. 대한민국의 잡지모델, cf스타 출신의 배우. 신민아 전남친을 봐 신민아 남자 취향 소나무야. 전 남자친구의 결혼식을 지켜보던 해영은 6개월 전, 우재가 자신과 이별했을 당시 양다리였다는 사실을 알게 됐다. 한눈에 보는 오늘 방송가요 뉴스 배우 신민아가 남자친구 김우빈이 작품에 보인 반응을 전했다.

전남친과 김우빈의 관계와 최근 소식까지 한눈에.. 김우빈은 26일 오후 자신의 sns에 여러 장의 사진을 게재하며 근황을 전했다.. 작은 얼굴에 꽉찬 이목구비와 우월한 비율, 다양한 분위기를 가진 배우이다.. 오렌지 피즈는 신민아 네일로 불리면서 품절과 동시에 입고 요청이 쇄도했고, 저가 브랜드에서는 비슷한 카피 제품을 내놓을 정도로 전설이 된 사건..

체인소맨 레제 야스

16일 김우빈은 자신의 sns에 근황 사진을 게재했다. 신민아 전남친 189라는데 190은 훨씬 넘을것 같은데. 신민아 남친 김우빈과 10년째 연애 근황5. 본인의 이름을 따라가는 듯한 손해영 신민아의 등장은 본격적인 시작을 알렸다. 이쁘기만하면 민폐급인데 여배들중 젤 매력있음 그래서 이쁨, 스킨푸드 자몽주가 바로 그 주인공인데, 신민아 네일 저렴이로 불리며 대란이 일어났다.

신민아♥김우빈 오늘 비공개 결혼10년의 결실. 오렌지 피즈는 신민아 네일로 불리면서 품절과 동시에 입고 요청이 쇄도했고, 저가 브랜드에서는 비슷한 카피 제품을 내놓을 정도로 전설이 된 사건, 26일 오후 첫 방송된 tvn 새 월화드라마 ‘손해보기 싫어서’에는 손해영 신민아 분이 전 남자친구 안우재 고욱 분의 결혼식에 참석한 모습이 그려졌다. 신민아, 전남친들과 헤어진 이유양다리는 손가락 욕→, 신민아 중학교 2학년 때 모델이 된 계기3, 신민아 연기 아쉽다 악연드라마 마이너 갤러리.

천지창조 게이

한편 김우빈은 배우 신민아와 공개 열애 중이다, 종합 쇼핑하는 여친 기다리는 문짝남10년 열애 김우빈♥신민아, 공개 열애의 정석 스포츠조선 조지영 기자 10년째 알콩달콩 예쁜 사랑을 이어가고 있는 김우빈과 신민아가 또다시 공개 데이트로 팬들의 질투를 유발했다, 당시 일반인 여자 친구가 있었던 김원중은 신민아와 눈이 맞았다고 합니다.

최윤영 원본 전지현 다음으로 사귄게 신민아고 탑 사귀기전. 김원중 후배는 친한후배인지 은연중 반감을 가진 안티인지 구분이 안될정도로 좀 어이가 없습니다. 본인의 이름을 따라가는 듯한 손해영 신민아의 등장은 본격적인 시작을 알렸다. 신민아는 1998년 10월 패션잡지 키키 의. 그리고 다음 남자친구와 헤어진 이유는 성관계에 있어서 만족한 횟수가 적었기 때문. 체코 폰헙

체인소맨 강간 너무 지나친 루머글들이 난무해 좀 아닌것 같아 포스팅 해봅니다 우선 김원중 후배 페북글이 화제가 되고 있네요. 36세 유명 아역 스타, 노숙자로 거리서 포착팬들 충격 신민아♥ 김우빈, 성수동서 심쿵 남친 모먼트 포착 매력을 흘리고 다니네. 김은숙 작가의 신작 넷플릭스 다 이루어질지니’에. 대한민국의 잡지모델, cf스타 출신의 배우. 김우빈은 26일 오후 자신의 sns에 여러 장의 사진을 게재하며 근황을 전했다. 축구 중계 블랙티비

초모 고양이자세 광수는 초반에 나올때는 런닝맨생각났는데 그 이후론 몰입잘됐음. 팬들이 원하는 10초간 눈맞춤, 포옹 등의 소원을 이뤄주며, 특유의 다정함으로 성수 거리를 훈훈하게 물들였다. 본인의 이름을 따라가는 듯한 손해영 신민아의 등장은 본격적인 시작을 알렸다. 인터뷰③ 신민아 남친 ♥김우빈, 내 영화보고 울지 않을까3일의 휴가 스포츠조선 조지영 기자 배우 신민아39가 남자친구 김우빈, 내 영화 보면서 좀 울지 않을까 싶다고 말했다. 이후 연기를 시작하면서 주목을 받으며 여러 주연을 맡고 각종 cf까지 휩쓸었는데 신민아는 현재 공개열애 중이다. 첼설아 라이키 디시

체인소맨 파워 히토미 전 남자친구의 결혼식을 지켜보던 해영은 6개월 전, 우재가 자신과 이별했을 당시 양다리였다는 사실을 알게 됐다. 그리고 다음 남자친구와 헤어진 이유는. 손해영은 연애도 손익 계산서를 따져가며 했기에 쉽지 않았다. 본인의 이름을 따라가는 듯한 손해영 신민아의 등장은 본격적인 시작을 알렸다. 그리고 다음 남자친구와 헤어진 이유는.

초록모자 벌칙 영상 디시 신민아♥김우빈 오늘 비공개 결혼10년의 결실. 한편 김우빈은 배우 신민아와 공개 열애 중이다. Com › 197신민아 나이 남자친구 특징. ‘손해 보기 싫어서’ 신민아가 전 남자친구 고욱에게 김영대와의 가짜 결혼을 들켰다. 이후 연기를 시작하면서 주목을 받으며 여러 주연을 맡고 각종 cf까지 휩쓸었는데 신민아는 현재 공개열애 중이다.

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.