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.

이상민 무슨 혼인신고서 제출을 와이프 없이 방송용으로 이용하냐 ㅇㅇ 211. 이상민이 20년 만에 재혼을 발표하며 큰 화제를 모으고 있습니다. Com › content › 1904684이상민, 재혼녀와의 근황 공개&mldr. 이현도 는 이상민과 룰라를 구원한 룰라 4집 《all system go》를 프로듀싱한 바 있다.

Basic-gary

Bj 금화 과거

Bj ㄴㅊ

Bj 오줌 야동

이상민 무슨 혼인신고서 제출을 와이프 없이 방송용으로 이용하냐 ㅇㅇ 211.. 지난 2일 디스패치 보도에 따르면 이상민 와이프는 1983년생 비연예인으로, 이상민보다 10세..

6일 전파를 탄 sbs ‘미운 우리 새끼’에서는, 민경훈♥ 와이프 신기은 pd 결혼식, 방송서 최초 공개 +나이. 이상민 아내 직업은 일반 직장인이며 아내는 초혼, 이상민은 재혼으로 2004년 가수겸 배우인 이혜영과 결혼을 한 바가 있으나 1년 2개월만에 이혼을 했다. 이혼 후 무려 20년 만에 비연예인 여성과 재혼 소식을 전해 많은 이들의 관심과 축복을 받고, 이상민 결혼 아내와의 러브스토리 공개 가수 이상민이 이혼 20년만에 재혼을 발표하며 화제가 됐었죠, 이상민이 20년 만에 재혼을 발표하며 큰 화제를 모으고 있습니다.

Bj 옐

11 2221 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용약관 개인정보처리방침 청소년보호.. 아내 향한 특별한 배려꽃다발로 마음 전해.. 잡포스트 이숙희 기자 이상민이 예능 프로그램에서 재혼 소식을 전하며 화제를 모았다.. 방송인 이상민이 아내와 함께하는 행복한 미식 일상을 공개하며 ‘사랑꾼’ 면모를 과시했다..

Keywords 허경환, 미운 우리 새끼, 근육, sbs 예능, 도발, 김종국, 터짐, 주우재, 허경환 키, 허경환 디시. Kr › news › articleview이상민 와이프, 10세 연하 비연예인&mldr. 11 2221 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용약관 개인정보처리방침 청소년보호, 지난달 30일 이상민은 서울의 한 구청에서 10세 연하의 예비신부 현 와이프와 혼인신고를 마쳤다.

bj di동 같은 날 이상민 측 관계자는 다수의 언론에 이상민이 아내와 서울 모 구청에서 지난달 30일 혼인신고를 했다고 밝혔다. 이날 방송에서 이상민은 병원에 가까워질수록 마음이 많이 떨린다 고 솔직한 심정을 털어놓았고, 아내 역시 긴장된 모습을 보였다. 이상민 재혼 상대, 아내 김미진부터 나이, 직업, 디시 반응까지 총정리예능인으로 오랜 시간 사랑받아온 이상민이 최근 재혼 소식을 전하며 대중의 이목을 집중시키고 있습니다. 부인 직업 시험관 결과 네이버 블로그 이슈 371개의 글 목록열기. 김희철은 사회를 보면서 민경훈의 결혼식을 진행했고, 민경훈이 결혼 서약서를 낭독할 때는 형님들 모두 눈시울을 붉혔다. beastman sotwe

bj 히요밍 6일 전파를 탄 sbs ‘미운 우리 새끼’에서는. Com › board › view단독 이상민, 비연예인과 재혼&mldr. 그는 잘나가던 가수의 길을 접고 1990년 후반부터 프로듀서로 변신해 그룹 ‘샤크라’, ‘샵’, ‘컨츄리꼬꼬’를 스타의 반열에 올리며 부와 명예를 거머쥐었다. 이상민 와이프 83년생이네 기타 국내 드라마 갤러리. 6일 전파를 탄 sbs 미운 우리 새끼에서는 깜짝 결혼. biya 사과문

bj박살 룸녀 1994년 혼성그룹 룰라로 데뷔하며 승승장구하던 이상민. 한덕수 구속 유력 말하는 기자들_공동체_0827. 이상민씨의 행복한 결혼 생활, 앞으로도 응원합니다. Com › discover › 이상민재혼녀tiktok. 6일 방송된 sbs ‘미운 우리 새끼’에는 이상민과 재혼한 10세 연하의 아내가 등장했다. bokep sonming

biya1024 논란 이상민은 30일 자신의 인스타그램에 손편지를 올리고 결혼 소식을 전했다. 지난 11일 방송된 jtbc 아는 형님에서 이상민은 멤버들의. 특히 이상민재혼, 이상민재혼상대, 이상민재혼녀, 이상민재혼아내, 이상민재혼상대김미진, 이상민재혼나이, 이상민재혼. 방송인 이상민이 아내와 함께하는 행복한 미식 일상을 공개하며 ‘사랑꾼’ 면모를 과시했다. 이상민 전 행안부 장관이 문건을 들고 대화하는 cctv도 확보 현금상자 사진을 와이프 폰에서.

bj유출 공개된 사진 속에는 이상민이 와이프와 함께 즐. 특히 10살 연하의 재혼녀에 대한 관심이 폭발적인데요. 이 말에 mc 탁재훈은 농담처럼 네가 결혼하면 난 애 낳는다고 했지만. 6일 방송된 sbs ‘미운 우리 새끼’에는 이상민과 재혼한 10세 연하의 아내가 등장했다. 나같으면 그런 능력이면 평생 혼자사는 한이 있어도 이상민이랑은 결혼 안할듯.

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.