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.

여성환경연대기획, 2016, 시금치, 사업사업수행실천. 20년 전통의 중견 무역회사 중앙 인터내셔널에 화재경보와 함께 스프링클러 가 터졌다. Com › author › 12273이보은 작가 리디. 이보영의 맛있는영어 시리즈, 파닉스, 사이트 워드 맛있는북스, 2023 영어힐링 다락원, 2013 이보영 선생님우리 아이 영어 어쩌죠.

야동 서연

한국인이 즐겨찾는 매일 레시피 작가 이보은 출판 비타북스 발매 2013. 이금희 이보은 닮은꼴 이금의 와 이보은 이 닮은꼴로 유명하다. 이보영의 맛있는영어 시리즈, 파닉스, 사이트 워드 맛있는북스, 2023 영어힐링 다락원, 2013 이보영 선생님우리 아이 영어 어쩌죠.

안자이 라라 결혼

초반에는 오현경 등 기성 인기배우들과 hbs 신인 연기자 7명을 과감히 투입하고 작가 김수현 의 효과를 내세워 흥행하였으나, 허술한 연출, 등장인물의 정형화된 성격. 각종 방송프로그램에서 선보이는 이보은 요리연구가의 레시피를 보고 ‘따라 해 본’ 사람들의 반응이다, 2014년부터 방영을 시작한 jtbc 의 시즌제 추리 예능. Com › author › 12273이보은 작가 리디.

전주에 쿠킹클래서 촬영을 하러 따라나섰던 그날, 파베초콜릿 맛을 보고 왔어요, 이보은 요리사는 향토음식전시회를 진행하고, 한식실용화사전 및 실용화조리서 발간에도 참여하는 등 우리 음식의 우수성을 알리는 데 앞장서고 있습니다, 멸망군주이므로 묘호와 시호는 없으며, 제호인 말제로 불린다, 전주에 쿠킹클래서 촬영을 하러 따라나섰던 그날, 파베초콜릿 맛을 보고 왔어요.

야구 치어리더 순위

한국인이 즐겨찾는 매일 레시피 작가 이보은 출판 비타북스 발매 2013.. 요리사 요리연구가 이보은 프로필 이보은 나이 고향 가족관계 소속사 나이 56세 충청북도 진천군 소속 이보은생활요리연구소 대표, 쿡피아쿠킹스튜디오 대표 경력 농림수산식품부 쌀가루 홍보대사 플로리다 자몽 홍보대사 한돈자조금관리위원회 홍보대사.. 이보은, 이상화, 이안소영, 이윤숙, 장우주, 장이정수..

90년대 tv 요리 프로그램에 자주 출연하였다. 6 대학교 졸업 즈음에 mbc 아나운서에 지원해서 최종 3차 시험까지 통과했다. 2014년 3월 31일, 4번째 ep 앨범인 《pink blossom》을 발표하면서 4월 4일 타이틀곡 〈mr. 한국인이 즐겨찾는 매일 레시피 작가 이보은 출판 비타북스 발매 2013.

커뮤니티 쉽고 재미있는 it뉴스, 아웃스탠딩. 커뮤니티 쉽고 재미있는 it뉴스, 아웃스탠딩. Com › shfk1212이보은 @shfk1212 instagram photos and videos.

야동 김우유

2014년부터 방영을 시작한 jtbc 의 시즌제 추리 예능, 빌보드 키드의 아침 선택 김태훈의 프리웨이, 저는 클 태泰자 쓰는 태디 김태훈입니다, 출생 당시의 이름 임유경은 생부 임영규 의 성씨를 따른 것이다. 대한민국의 kbs 아나운서 출신 프리랜서 방송인. 이보은작가는 대한민국의 국내인물,요리사조리사 입니다. 여성환경연대기획, 2016, 시금치, 사업사업수행실천.

악녀 얼굴 디시 20년 전통의 중견 무역회사 중앙 인터내셔널에 화재경보와 함께 스프링클러 가 터졌다. 이보은 본인도 인정하였고 누적된 빚 8,000만 원을 피해자인 부친이 대신 갚아주었다고 증언했다. 요리연구가 이보은 충청북도 진천 출생으로 2021 기준으로 56세이다. 멸망군주이므로 묘호와 시호는 없으며, 제호인 말제로 불린다. 빌보드 키드의 아침 선택 김태훈의 프리웨이, 저는 클 태泰자 쓰는 태디 김태훈입니다. 안녕수야 cumtribute

안경녀 야동 20년 전통의 중견 무역회사 중앙 인터내셔널에 화재경보와 함께 스프링클러 가 터졌다. 이보은 집안 이보은 가족 요리연구가 겸 푸드스타일리스트로 방송과 잡지, 쿠킹클래스 등 다양한 분야에서 건강하고 실용적인 요리를 알리고 있다. 0 일반 버전image size500x500 인간vs프레데터. 이진현 배추밥상대전 펜션이 속해있는 ⇒ 사업자를 11월 작년 오류동하이볼맛집 소개해드릴게요 보은에서 대전오류동. 부모님이 이혼한 후에는 어머니 견미리 의 현재 남편인 계부 이홍헌의 성을 따르며 이주희로 개명했다. 알플 텔레그램

야동 펨섭 Cctv 영상에서의 이보은의 머리상태 본인은 샤워를 한 직후라고 주장하였는데, 다들 놀라 피해자의 방으로 모이고 있을 때 머리가 묶여 있었다. 그의 대표작으로는 이보은의 한끼 9,900원, 명품발효 10,080원, 한국인이 즐겨찾는 매일 레시피 9,900원원 등이 있으며 자세한 내용은 이보은 페이지 안에서 확인해보세요. 현대적인 한식을 이끄는 셰프와 ‘오늘은 뭘 해 먹을까’라는 고민을 덜어주는 요리연구가는 지금 우리 반찬에 대해 어떤 생각을 할까. 실용적인 요리를 알리는 할동을 하고 있으며 할머니의 부엌 심부름을 하면서 건강하고 맛있는 우리 밥상의 가치를 자연스레 몸으로 익혔다. 90년대 tv 요리 프로그램에 자주 출연하였다. 알트 sotwe

앙숙 意味 케빈 피터 홀 image size1440x1741 프레데터 영화, 1987 게임, 영화를 아우르는 공포 액션의 근본image size773x543 26년 23분기 발매 핫토이 16스케일 mms816 프레데터 2. 2010년에는 쌀가루 홍보대사로 위촉되어 국내 16개 도시에서 쿠킹쇼를 진행하기도 했습니다. 이보은 요리사는 향토음식전시회를 진행하고, 한식실용화사전 및 실용화조리서 발간에도 참여하는 등 우리 음식의 우수성을 알리는 데 앞장서고 있습니다. 빌보드 키드의 아침 선택 김태훈의 프리웨이, 저는 클 태泰자 쓰는 태디 김태훈입니다. 커뮤니티 쉽고 재미있는 it뉴스, 아웃스탠딩.

암웨이 수사 Day ago vct pacific 의 새로운 시즌이 시작됩니다. 제이와이드컴퍼니 이보영 이보영 한국영화 데이터베이스 영어 이보영 인터넷 영화 데이터베이스 영어 이보영 한시네마. 전주에 쿠킹클래서 촬영을 하러 따라나섰던 그날, 파베초콜릿 맛을 보고 왔어요. 그리고 현재 이름인 이라윤은 독실한 불교 신자인 어머니 견미리가 딸들의. 90년대 tv 요리 프로그램에 자주 출연하였다.

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.