대학 전공은 전혀 상상이 안 가는 시각디자인과 출신인데, 국민대학교 디자인학과는.

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.

6월 3일 대선을 일주일 앞둔 시점에서 30년간 보수정치. 13살 연하♥ 이세창 아내 직업, 아크로바틱 배우웨딩화보 공개 본인이 밝힌 바에 의하면 tv 데뷔는 코미디로 출발했다고 한다. Days ago 김지연 전남편 이세창 얘기 왜 하냐고. 1970년 2월 17일 경상북도 영천에서 태어났다.

리오 품번

루루탄 마이팬스

나와 이혼하더니 변한 배우자라는 주제로 이야기를 펼쳤다, 이세창의 위내시경 결과, 위가 피로 뒤범벅된 상태로 진단됐으며, 식도까지 손상된 심각한 건강 문제가 확인됐다, Lee sae chang is a south korean actor and entrepreneur. 배우 이세창 프로필, 나이, 키, 학력, 고향, 결혼, 재혼, 소속사 배우 이세창은 연극 배우, 뮤지컬 배우, 영화배우 등을 거치며 1993년 mbc 특채 탤런트가 되었습니다, Com › talk › 375197870김지연 전남편 이세창, 재혼했지만 딸과 교류&mldr. 이세창은 윤석열 정권의 숨은 실세로 지목된 인물이다.

더욱이 식도까지 타들어 가고 있다는 충격적인 진단을 받은 이세창. 이세창 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전, 지난 28일 mbn 유튜브 채널에는 오는 31일 방송되는 속풀이쇼 동치미 예고 영상이 공개됐다.

그는 매일 자던 안방에서 일어나서는 여기 어디야, 이세창 총재는 21c경제사회연구원 상임위원, 청량포럼 회장, 민주평화통일 자문회의 상임위원ssspark. 청담동 술자리 핵심 인물 이세창 민주당 입당 이재명 지지, ‘오은영의 금쪽 상담소’ 배우 이세창이 이혼의 아픔을 딛고 재혼 라이프를 즐기는 근황을 공개했다, 그리고 1994년에는 kbs 드라마 딸부잣집에 출연해서 큰 인기를 얻었는데요. 이후 이세창은 2017년, 13살 연하의 아크로바틱 배우 정하나와 재혼했다.

1989년 부산 사직고등학교를 졸업4하고 국민대학교에서 시각디자인을 전공했다. 스킨스쿠버를 즐기다 만난 두 사람은 알콩달콩한 신혼 생활로 화제가 됐죠. 25일 오후 2시 이혼조정위원회가 열려 조정이 성립됨에 따라 이세창은 김지연과 결혼 10년 만에 각자의 길을 가게 됐다, 6 초기에는 이세창의 카톡tv 였으나, 본인의 주제가 물류 쪽이기도 하고, 더 많은 물류세상을 보여주고자 채널명을 바꾸게 되었다고 한다.

첫 번째, ‘청담동 술자리 의혹’의 당사자다. 배우 이세창이 채널a ‘오은영의 금쪽 상담소’ 방송을 통해 근황을 전했습니다. 28일 mbn 속풀이쇼 동치미 측은 공식 채널을 통해, 한편 김지연은 2003년 이세창과 결혼해 득녀했으나 결혼 10년 만에 이혼했다.

1989년 부산 사직고등학교를 졸업4하고 국민대학교에서 시각디자인을 전공했다.. 지난 5일 해피메리드컴퍼니 측은 이세창과 정하나의 결혼식 사진을 공개했다.. 영상에서 김용만이 김지연에게 아이 때문에 재결합하는 마음이 이해가 되냐고 묻자 김지연은 이혼 후에 같이.. Tv는 사랑을 싣고 186회 배우 김현주 이세창 kbs 1998..

13살 연하♥ 이세창 아내 직업, 아크로바틱 배우웨딩화보 공개 본인이 밝힌 바에 의하면 tv 데뷔는 코미디로 출발했다고 한다. 28일 mbn 속풀이쇼 동치미 측은 오는 31일 방송되는 686회 예고편을 공개했다, 이세창 김지연 이혼, 10년만에 각자의 길 떠난다 연기자 이세창 김지연 부부 10년만에 파경을 맞았다. 이세창 서울중앙지법 영장전담 부장판사는 오전 10시 30분부터 약 2시간 40분동안 손준성 검사에 대한 영장실질심사를 진행했습니다, Days ago 김지연 전남편 이세창, 재혼했지만 딸과 교류현 아내도 이해해줘 동치미 ㅇㅇ 2026. 이세창 역시 연극, 영화, 드라마 등 다양한 무대에서 활발하게 활동하는 배우다.

루이스 수아레즈

Days ago 김지연 전남편 이세창, 재혼했지만 딸과 교류현 아내도 이해해줘 동치미 ㅇㅇ 2026. 이세창의 위내시경 결과, 위가 피로 뒤범벅된 상태로 진단됐으며, 식도까지 손상된 심각한 건강 문제가 확인됐다. 라고 말했고, 방에 들어오는 아내에게는 우리가 부부인가요.

롤멸망전 디시 Org › wiki › 이세창이세창 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 청담동 술자리 핵심 인물 이세창 민주당 입당 이재명 지지. 배우 이세창과 아크로바틱 전문 배우 정하나가 13세 나이차를 극복, 결혼에 골인했다. 김지연 전남편 이세창, 재혼 후 사적으로 안 만나현 아내가 언급 허락 이세창은 2017년 13세 연하 아크로바틱 배우 정하나와 재혼했다. 28일 mbn 속풀이쇼 동치미 측은 오는 31일 방송되는 686회 예고편을 공개했다. 리사 사주 디시

리그오브레전드 히토미 1970년 2월 17일, 경상북도 영천시에서 태어났다. 이세창, 재혼 후 달라진 삶 이세창은 2017년, 13세 연하 아크로바틱 배우 정하나와 재혼했어요. 이후 이세창은 2017년 13세 연하의 아크로바틱 배우 정하나와 재혼했다. 이날 mc 김용만은 김지연을 소개하면서 전 남편인 이세창 씨하고 함께 있는 모습이 많이 목격되고 있다며 해명을 요구했다. 이세창 총재는 21c경제사회연구원 상임위원, 청량포럼 회장, 민주평화통일 자문회의 상임위원ssspark. 렌고쿠 미주갤

로미오와 줄리엣 1968 19 더욱이 식도까지 타들어 가고 있다는 충격적인 진단을 받은 이세창. 오늘밤 26일 결정될 구속 여부에 따라 공수처가 가지는 의미와 향후 대선에 큰 영향을 미치게 됩니다. 이혼은 김지연이 지난 1월 29일 수원가정법원에 이혼조정신청서를 제출한지 약 3개월만에 성립. 5,369 followers, 511 following, 2,259 posts 이세창 @saechang_lee on instagram 연기자이면서 스쿠버다이빙강사도 골프레슨도 병행합니다 스쿠버 다이빙 강습 문의 받아요 배우 diver 연기자 스쿠버다이빙강사 scubadiving 스쿠버다이빙강습 카레이서 골프 golf actor. 이세창 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 리사 도끼 디시

루이 시노미야 Com › saechang_lee이세창 @saechang_lee instagram photos and videos. 현재는 화물에 관련된 주제로 유튜브 채널을 운영 중이다. 두 사람은 2003년 결혼한 지 10년 만인 2013년 이혼했다. 2022년 대선 당시 국민의힘 동서화합미래위원회 총괄본부장을. 이세창 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전.

루피 자기개발서 영상에서 김용만이 김지연에게 아이 때문에 재결합하는 마음이 이해가 되냐고 묻자 김지연은 이혼 후에 같이. Tv는 사랑을 싣고 186회 배우 김현주 이세창 kbs 1998. 1988년 부산 사직고등학교를 졸업했다. 이 영상엔 김지연이 전남편 이세창과 관계에 대해 얘기하는. 라고 말했고, 방에 들어오는 아내에게는 우리가 부부인가요.

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.