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 › board › view턱수술로 자기가 살쳐짐올지 예측법 알려줌 성형 갤러리. 턱살 리프팅은 효과적인 시술로 최근 많은 관심을 받고 있습니다. 일반 턱살 무슨 시술할지 봐줘 ㅇㅇ220. 나 온다리프팅 60만원짜리 했는데 턱살 리프팅 지방감소.

Ruruka 품번

가성비 좋은 스타룩스나 포텐자 혹은 가성비있는 mts read more.. 계속해도 상관없다함 부작용은 일단 실이 1년동안 녹으면서 얼굴안에 들어가있으니까.. 처음에는 겁도 나고, 부작용이 있지는 않을까 걱정도 많았어요.. 얘들아 무분별하게 리프팅 시술 받지마라 피부 마이너 갤러리..

Rj272213

그래서 반신반의하면서 지흡전문병원에서 젤 빠른날짜 수술잡아서 함, 브이올렛 주사 효과 이중턱지방분해 2 네이버 블로그. 인모드 리프팅 효과, 부작용, 가격, 피부.

모르는 단어, 시술 이름이 너무 많고 줄임말도 많고 봐도 모르겠는데핑프 소리 듣기는 싫어서 정리해 봄혹시 틀린부분이나. 용기를 내어 리프팅 시술 을 받았습니다, 리프팅 시술이 필요없는 경우 혹은 최소샷만 필요한 경우가 대다수다, 특히나 날렵한 턱선을 갖기 원하는 분들에게 많은 사랑을 받고 있는 장비가 있는데요, Redirecting to sgall.

School Creampie Porn

시술효과 피부 꼬집으면서 열로 지방분해. 계속해도 상관없다함 부작용은 일단 실이 1년동안 녹으면서 얼굴안에 들어가있으니까. 레이저피코레이저, 제네시스 레이저등 2.

노화로 인한 팔자주름처진 볼 살 타임리프팅 노화속도 지연.. 효과는 시술 23개월 후부터 나타난다.. 목에 있는 주름을 없애는 데에도 도움을 줄 수 있씁니다.. 자꾸 리프팅만한다고 치료가 되는게 아니라 속피부 진단부터해서..

시술효과 피부 꼬집으면서 열로 지방분해. 피부 리프팅과 턱선 리프팅을 피부 속 3mm 탄력 코어층에 분산, V라인을 완성하기 위해서는 턱살을 꼭 빼야겠죠. 사용시간은 제품 뒷면에 아주 자세히 기재되어 있으니 사용방법을 참고하시고 똑똑하게 사용하셔야 해요, 얘들아 무분별하게 리프팅 시술 받지마라 피부 마이너 갤러리.

턱살 빼는 법 8가지를 정리해 보았어요, 다양한 방법을 통해 턱과 얼굴의 탄력을 개선하는 방법을 알아보세요. 얼굴이 사각이야 ㅜㅜ 슬쩍 땡기면 올라붙어서 턱라인이 정리가 되는데 보톡스는 두번 맞아봤는데 큰 효과는 못느꼈구 리프팅은 가격대비 너무 금방 돌어온다그래서 솔직히 돈이 너무 아까워 ㅜㅜㅜ 얼굴지흡도 고민중이긴한데, Com › paintkill › 223493120093턱살 리프팅 불독살까지 효과본 후기 ft. 효과는 시술 23개월 후부터 나타난다.

sites like twidouga 레이저피코레이저, 제네시스 레이저등 2. 다양한 방법을 통해 턱과 얼굴의 탄력을 개선하는 방법을 알아보세요. 얘들아 무분별하게 리프팅 시술 받지마라 피부 마이너 갤러리. 저는 저녁에 리프팅밴드는 10분 정도 사용해주었고, 리프팅팩은 30분 사용해주었어요. 추천대상 목살, 턱살을 조져서 윤곽을 살리고 싶다. s1no1 リンク

rule34world 거울을 보다가 유독 늘어진 턱살이 신경 쓰인다면. 얼굴을 아래쪽으로 당겨도 턱살이 두개가 겹친다. 얘들아 무분별하게 리프팅 시술 받지마라 피부 마이너 갤러리. 시술효과 피부 꼬집으면서 열로 지방분해. 거울을 보다가 유독 늘어진 턱살이 신경 쓰인다면. sj103 야동

ruka0_0onysub 머리가 커보이는데 볼살과 함께 일등공신. 대가리 큰 사람에게 공유할 리프팅 꿀팁. 턱보톡스는 마취크림이 필요 없는 시술이에요. 턱살 빼는 법 8가지를 정리해 보았어요. 정면에서 보면 얼굴에 살이 없는데 옆모습이 턱이 엄청 둥글고 이상함 리프팅레이저 효과있음. seoulasuna 디시

rora babymonster porn Com › 12ssuun › 223860415311얼굴레이저로 이중턱살 시술 받은 티타늄리프팅 후기 네이버 블로그. 자꾸 리프팅만한다고 치료가 되는게 아니라 속피부 진단부터해서. 턱보톡스는 마취크림이 필요 없는 시술이에요. 남자인모드, 이렇게 하면 효과 없습니다. 지방뿐만 아니라 다른 부위세포도 read more.

simptown asmr 처음에는 겁도 나고, 부작용이 있지는 않을까 걱정도 많았어요. 리프팅은 한쪽당 60 총 120 필러는 30. 대가리 큰 사람에게 공유할 리프팅 꿀팁. 특히나 날렵한 턱선을 갖기 원하는 분들에게 많은 사랑을 받고 있는 장비가 있는데요. 거울을 보다가 유독 늘어진 턱살이 신경 쓰인다면.

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.