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.

맘스터치의 간장마늘빅싸이순살을 먹어봤습니다. 김치와 채소류를 많이 곁들여 먹은 것도 아닌데. 싸이순살 마늘간장 양념중에 ㅊㅊ좀 ㅇㅇ 121. 결론부터 말하자면 큼지막한 순살치킨 크기에 속은 촉촉하고 겉은 바삭한게 고기가 퍽퍽하지 않고 육즙가득한 순살치킨과 간장마늘소스가 어우러져 이건.

문서윤 전남친 디시

정말 맛있는 치킨과 함께하는 먹방을 놓치지 마세요.. 난 간장마늘 먹었는데 양념맛이 약해져서 별로더라..

간장 베이스 양념에 알싸한 마늘향이 더해져 남녀노소 호불호 없이 누구나 좋아할 만한 맛이더라고요. 맘스터치 빅싸이순살, 맘스터치 핫치즈빅싸이. 안데스 소금, 마늘양파 시즈닝을 사용해 맛이 담백하고 감칠맛이 좋고, 직화 통살구이 방식으로 구워 겉은 바삭하고 속은 촉촉한 식감이 유지돼요, 맘터 간장마늘 싸이순살후기 맘스터치 마이너 갤러리, 꿀간장누룽지순살치킨 맘스터치 최고메뉴, 간장 베이스 양념에 알싸한 마늘향이 더해져 남녀노소 호불호 없이 누구나 좋아할 만한 맛이더라고요.

짜잔 이게 오늘 포스팅에서 소개하려는 간장마늘 싸이순살 후라이드보단 짭짤한 양념이 된 치킨이 좋아서 간장마늘 싸이순살로 골라봤다 달짝지근한 간장마늘 소스가 끈적하게 베어있는 짭조름한 순살 치킨이다 주문과 동시에 조리되어 갓 튀겨져 나왔다. 목포 17년 대박 맛집 갈치조림 레시피💚 갈치 4덩이 약 500g. 03 1808 ㅇㅍㅊ 그냥 양념보다 핫치즈, 간장마늘, 치파오 얘네가 맛있는데 해줄지는 점바점 2024, Com › mellowpea_ › 223209735977맘스터치 순살치킨 간장마늘싸이 내돈내산 솔직후기 +맛 네이버. 맘스터치 치킨 신제품 간장마늘 빅싸이순살맥스 네이버 블로그.

결론부터 말하자면 큼지막한 순살치킨 크기에 속은 촉촉하고 겉은 바삭한게 고기가 퍽퍽하지 않고 육즙가득한 순살치킨과 간장마늘소스가 어우러져 이건, 141 약간 kfc 후참잘st 매운염지 후라이드임 2024. 맘터빅싸이순살간장마늘맛만큼우울하다 은둔형 외톨이, 간장마늘 간장치킨인데 약간 찐득해서 개인적으로 불호 핫치즈 매운거 잘먹으면 맛있음 난 까르보불닭정도라 힘들더라 다른 알바생들은 맛있다함. 마늘 1스푼, 간장 2스푼 백간장 사용 1.

무파사톡 가사

03 1810 이나바쿠모리 치파오 좋아하는데 ㄲㅂ 2024. 빅싸이순살맥스는 후라이드, 간장마늘, 양념, 핫 치즈, 꿀 간장 누룽지 이렇게 다섯 가지다. Com › board › view맘터 간장마늘 싸이순살후기 치킨 갤러리. 김치와 채소류를 많이 곁들여 먹은 것도 아닌데, 댓글 2 전체보기 1,049개의 글 목록열기.

Com › community › board오늘 처음으로 맘스터치 간장마늘빅싸이순살치킨 먹어봤는데. 정말 맛있는 치킨과 함께하는 먹방을 놓치지 마세요, 빅싸이순살맥스는 후라이드, 간장마늘, 양념, 핫 치즈, 꿀 간장 누룽지 이렇게 다섯 가지다.

짜잔 이게 오늘 포스팅에서 소개하려는 간장마늘 싸이순살 후라이드보단 짭짤한 양념이 된 치킨이 좋아서 간장마늘 싸이순살로 골라봤다 달짝지근한 간장마늘 소스가 끈적하게 베어있는 짭조름한 순살 치킨이다 주문과 동시에 조리되어 갓 튀겨져 나왔다. 물에 국거리고기를 넣고 맛술을 넣어 끓여낸다. 맘스터치 치킨 간장마늘치킨, 핫치즈 빅싸이순살, 바삭크림.

문서윤 사주 디시

치킨순살치킨맘스터치 싸이순살 간장마늘세트 무난하고 양 많아 네이버 블로그 전체보기 177개의 글 목록열기, ㄷㄱㄱㄱ 예비발행 블록체인에 nft 발행 전 디시인사이드 db에 우선 nft 정보를 저장한 상태 실발행 예비발행한 nft가 판매가 완료되어 클레이튼 블록체인에 nft를 발행한 상태. 100마리 정도 먹었는데 여전히 맛있다. 모두 기존의 맘스터치 순살치킨 메뉴보다 빅 사이즈 조각.

그리고 크기가 커지니까 먹기 불편해짐 2024. 꿀간장누룽지순살치킨 맘스터치 최고메뉴, 단짠단짠이 매력적이라 시원한 맥주와 같이 먹어도 완전 찰떡궁합일 것 같아요, 맘스터치의 간장마늘빅싸이순살을 먹어봤습니다. 03 1810 이나바쿠모리 치파오 좋아하는데 ㄲㅂ 2024.

미국 서부 무료주차 가능한 호텔 100마리 정도 먹었는데 여전히 맛있다. 100마리 정도 먹었는데 여전히 맛있다. 간장치킨 좋아하시는 분들은 주문하시면 만족하실것 같아요. 맘스터치 치킨 신제품 간장마늘 빅싸이순살맥스 네이버 블로그. 꿀간장누룽지순살치킨 맘스터치 최고메뉴. 미드 굿 닥터 시즌 7

미스딜라이트 맘스터치의 간장마늘빅싸이순살을 먹어봤습니다. 맘스터치 빅싸이순살, 맘스터치 핫치즈빅싸이. 난 간장마늘 먹었는데 양념맛이 약해져서 별로더라. 간장마늘 간장치킨인데 약간 찐득해서 개인적으로 불호 핫치즈 매운거 잘먹으면 맛있음 난 까르보불닭정도라 힘들더라 다른 알바생들은 맛있다함. 모두 기존의 맘스터치 순살치킨 메뉴보다 빅 사이즈 조각. 미르하 전생

민트숯불치킨 논란 Com › mgallery › board싸이순살 먹어본사람 추천좀 위버스 마이너 갤러리. 물에 국거리고기를 넣고 맛술을 넣어 끓여낸다. 댓글 2 전체보기 1,049개의 글 목록열기. 류수영 출처 유튜브 kbs entertainment 편. 치킨메뉴는 다 싸이버거 맛이 깔려서 맘에 들어 간장마늘떡강정 이거 별로야. 민유미동영상

무파사토크 가사 김치와 채소류를 많이 곁들여 먹은 것도 아닌데. 간장치킨 좋아하시는 분들은 주문하시면 만족하실것 같아요. 댓글 2 전체보기 1,049개의 글 목록열기. Com › board › view맘터 싸이순살 간장마늘맛 맘스터치 치킨 간장마늘치킨, 핫치즈 빅싸이순살, 바삭크림.

문월 직캠 Com › 7561523769핫딜에 맘스터치 간장마늘빅싸이순살맥스 음식여행 에펨코리아. 짜잔 이게 오늘 포스팅에서 소개하려는 간장마늘 싸이순살 후라이드보단 짭짤한 양념이 된 치킨이 좋아서 간장마늘 싸이순살로 골라봤다 달짝지근한 간장마늘 소스가 끈적하게 베어있는 짭조름한 순살 치킨이다 주문과 동시에 조리되어 갓 튀겨져 나왔다. 난 간장마늘 먹었는데 양념맛이 약해져서 별로더라. 치킨순살치킨맘스터치 싸이순살 간장마늘세트 무난하고 양 많아 네이버 블로그 전체보기 177개의 글 목록열기. 치킨메뉴는 다 싸이버거 맛이 깔려서 맘에 들어 간장마늘떡강정 이거 별로야.

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.