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.

요즘 아이브의 새로운 곡 attitude가 많은 사랑을 받고 있어요. 아이브@ivestarship의 폭주기니 밈, 그게 뭔데. Advertisement どちらの使い方も日本語に訳すと「〜だから」「〜たら」となることが多いのですね。 似た意味＆似た使い方での単語は「니까」があります。 ほぼ同じ単語という認識でいいと思います。. 그 의미와 유래는 흥미롭고 여러 맥락에서 사용될 수 있습니다.

폭주기니는 아이브ive의 애티튜드attitude 안무에서 유래된 밈임.. 目次 ページ先頭 朝鮮語 朝鮮語サブセクションを切り替えます 発音.. 分類： 源自英語的朝鮮語借詞 派生自英語的朝鮮語詞 源自法語的朝鮮語借詞 派生自法語的朝鮮語詞 有國際音標的朝鮮語詞 朝鮮語詞元 朝鮮語專有名詞 朝鮮語 非洲國家 朝鮮語 國家 第一音節有長元音的朝鮮語詞 朝鮮語非詞元形式 朝鮮語形容詞變格形 手動轉寫與自動轉寫不同的朝鮮語詞 有詞條.. Org › wiki › 기니기니 wiktionary, the free dictionary..

위의 버튼을 누르면 당시 영상을 시청할 수 있습니다. 어떤 상황에서 과하게 몰입하거나 폭주하는 사람을 재미있게 표현할 때 사용돼요, 팬들이 붙여준 폭주기니를 sbs 인기가요 앵콜 라이브에서 개사해 부르면서 더욱 화제가 되고 있습니다, 아이브 레이 폭주기니 영상 보기 ‘폭주기니’의 유래 아이브 레이와 팬덤 문화 ‘폭주기니’라는 표현이 대중적으로 확산된 배경에는 kpop 아이돌 그룹 아이브 ive의 멤버 ‘레이 rei’가 결정적인 역할을 했습니다. Com › questions › 27029317기니とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問 hinative.

폭주기니란폭주기니는 최근 kpop 그룹 아이브ive의 멤버 레이rei를 지칭하는 별명으로, 아이브의 신곡 attitude에서 레이가 선보이는 에너지 넘치는 안무가 마치 폭주하는 기니피그를 연상시킨다는 팬들의 반응에서 유래했습니다. 최근 kpop 팬들 사이에서 폭주기니라는 신조어가 화제가 되고 있습니다. Jp › content › 기니닭기니닭の意味 韓国語辞書 weblio日韓韓日辞典. 「기니 금화」とは？ 韓国語の意味・読み方・発音 スポンサーリンク ハングル기니 금화 英名・英訳 geordie 類義語 21실링의 금액 그방언 석탄배 탄갱부 この語句の意味を登録.

「기니 금화」とは？ 韓国語の意味・読み方・発音 スポンサーリンク ハングル기니 금화 英名・英訳 geordie 類義語 21실링의 금액 그방언 석탄배 탄갱부 この語句の意味を登録. 폭주기니는 폭주하는 기니피그라는 뜻으로 아이브의, 아이브@ivestarship의 폭주기니 밈, 그게 뭔데. 意味 「기니닭」を含む日韓韓日辞典の索引 기니닭のページへのリンク 「기니닭」の関連用語 1 ホロホロチョウ 日韓韓日専門用語 100% 2 ホロホロ鳥 日韓韓日専門用語 100% テキスト翻訳 weblio翻訳 기니닭のお隣キーワード 기능회복 훈련실 기능흐름분석. 目次 ページ先頭 朝鮮語 朝鮮語サブセクションを切り替えます 発音.

올림푸스녀 야동

털이 엄청 긴 실키, 텍셀 같은 장모종에서부터 스키니. 폭주기니란폭주기니는 최근 kpop 그룹 아이브ive의 멤버 레이rei를 지칭하는 별명으로, 아이브의 신곡 attitude에서 레이가 선보이는 에너지 넘치는 안무가 마치 폭주하는 기니피그를 연상시킨다는 팬들의 반응에서 유래했습니다. 이 표현은 아이브ive의 신곡 애티튜드attitude의 특정 안무에서 유래한 것으로, 독특한 움직임이 귀여운 기니피그guinea pig가 폭주하는 모습과 닮았다는 팬들의 해석에서 비롯되었습니다. Eu › 기니기니‎ korean meaning, translation wordsense. 이 글에서는 폭주기니의 뜻과 역사, 그리고 어떻게 현재의 모습으로 발전해왔는지 자세히 살펴보겠습니다.

Org › wiki › 기니기니 wiktionary, the free dictionary. 본 글에서는 폭주기니의 정확한 의미와 유래, 그리고 이 용어가 어떻게 발전해 나가는지를 자세히 다루도록 하겠습니다, Com › questions › 27029317기니とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問 hinative, 이 단어는 일본어에서 공식적이거나 비공식적인 상황 모두에서 사용될 수 있는 일반적인 명칭입니다.

이쁘게봐주세용 の意味について。 上記の韓国語をそのまま翻訳すると、 きれいに見てね！ となると思うのですが、 日本語ではどういう意味合いになるのでしょうか。 相手はテレビに出 ているようなお仕事の方なので、私を綺麗に見て！.. ขออนุญาตแอดมินกลุ่มครับ🙏 ติดตาม@ ผู้ดูแล@ทุกคน ปิด.. 햄스터 와 비슷하게 생겼으며, 휘파람소리처럼 특이한 울음.. Jp › content › 기니닭기니닭の意味 韓国語辞書 weblio日韓韓日辞典..

왕가슴 의붓 여동생,습격

최근 kpop 팬들 사이에서 폭주기니라는 신조어가 화제가 되고 있습니다, 폭주기니는 폭주하는 기니피그라는 뜻으로 아이브의. 今回の国名は「ギニア기니」です。 発音は「キニ」のようになります。 日本語では「～ニア」で終わりますが、, Jp › content › 기니닭기니닭の意味 韓国語辞書 weblio日韓韓日辞典.

－니？とは、～するかい？の韓国語ページ kpedia 「～するかい？」は韓国語で「－니？」です。. English translation guinea more meanings for 기니 gini, Org › wiki › 기니기니 ウィクショナリー日本語版. 털이 엄청 긴 실키, 텍셀 같은 장모종에서부터 스키니. 얼마전에 kpop 팬덤 사이에서 폭주기니라는 신조어가 생겨났는데요, 이 표현은 걸그룹 아이브ive의 신곡 애티튜드 안무에서 비롯된 것으로, 팬들이 특정 안무 동작을 폭주하는 기니피그에 비유하면서 생겨난 유쾌한 밈입니다.

올라 잇 디시

Com › entry › 폭주기니뜻과폭주기니 뜻과 유래, 직장인도 쉽게 이해하는 밈 가이드, 힙합과 기니기니의 매력, 후지나가 스타일, 힙합 비디오, 기니기니 意味, ヴァーチャルインサニティ 和訳, virtual insanity 歌詞 日本語. 기본형 楽しむ 의 모양을 바꿔서 楽しみ명사형 기대, 즐거움 + ～にしている를 하고 있다.

English translation guinea more meanings for 기니 gini, Question about korean. 「見ててほっこりする」韓国アイドル、満面の笑みでファン魅了 韓国アイドル『ive』が8日、公式インスタグラムを更新した。画像「前髪ありは反則read more. 폭주기니의 탄생과 확산 과정 📱🌊아이브 멤버들의 반응 😍👑폭주기니의 인기 비결 ⭐️.

요니링 유출 分類： 源自英語的朝鮮語借詞 派生自英語的朝鮮語詞 源自法語的朝鮮語借詞 派生自法語的朝鮮語詞 有國際音標的朝鮮語詞 朝鮮語詞元 朝鮮語專有名詞 朝鮮語 非洲國家 朝鮮語 國家 第一音節有長元音的朝鮮語詞 朝鮮語非詞元形式 朝鮮語形容詞變格形 手動轉寫與自動轉寫不同的朝鮮語詞 有詞條. Question about korean. 이 단어는 일본어에서 공식적이거나 비공식적인 상황 모두에서 사용될 수 있는 일반적인 명칭입니다. アフリカの国 ギニア。 最終編集 3 年前、. 따라서, 이 경우에는 특별히 다른 표현을 사용하여 격식을 차리거나 편안하게 표현할 필요가 없습니다. 와일드식 일본인 아내

올라탄 자세 요즘 아이브의 새로운 곡 attitude가 많은 사랑을 받고 있어요. 팬들이 붙여준 폭주기니를 sbs 인기가요 앵콜 라이브에서 개사해 부르면서 더욱 화제가 되고 있습니다. 아이브 레이 폭주기니 영상 보기 ‘폭주기니’의 유래 아이브 레이와 팬덤 문화 ‘폭주기니’라는 표현이 대중적으로 확산된 배경에는 kpop 아이돌 그룹 아이브 ive의 멤버 ‘레이 rei’가 결정적인 역할을 했습니다. Com › questions › 21922688기니 놈들. Comsorkel205223759849346 「기니（キニ）」はiveの間で流行ってる「集団」とか「族」を意味する言葉で多分ここでは熱狂的なfanを. 요루 덴지

오해원 이상한 소리 日本語の「モルモット」は、医学実験などでも聞いたことがある方も多いかも。 韓国では기니피그（ギニーピッグ）と read more. 20세기 중후반 기니 정부의 친 親사회주의 노선 및 북한과 더 긴밀한 외교관계 성향 때문에 20세기에 대한민국 과 수교한 적이 없다. 아이브의 레이와 안유진이 함께하는 폭주기니 댄스를 만나보세요. 본 글에서는 폭주기니의 정확한 의미와 유래, 그리고 이 용어가 어떻게 발전해 나가는지를 자세히 다루도록 하겠습니다. 기본형 楽しむ 의 모양을 바꿔서 楽しみ명사형 기대, 즐거움 + ～にしている를 하고 있다. 오줌 웹툰

우보아 이 표현은 아이브ive의 신곡 애티튜드attitude의 특정 안무에서 유래한 것으로, 독특한 움직임이 귀여운 기니피그guinea pig가 폭주하는 모습과 닮았다는 팬들의 해석에서 비롯되었습니다. 目次 ページ先頭 朝鮮語 朝鮮語サブセクションを切り替えます 発音. 그럼 폭주기니가 무엇인지 아이브와는 어떤 관계가 있는지 자세히 알아볼까요. 포인트 댄스인 와이퍼 춤을 비롯해 화제가 되어버린 와 관련한 설명을 드리겠습니다. 기니피그의 소리는 어떤 의미가 있나요.

요정 날리기 아메드 세쿠 투레는 1984년 3월 26일 미국에서 사망했고, 기니 군에서는 1984년 4월 3일, 란사나 콩테 가 쿠데타를 일으켜 정권을 잡았다. とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問 hin. モルモットです。 explanation in korean 일본어에서 기니피그는 モルモット로 번역됩니다. 폭주기니의 탄생과 확산 과정 📱🌊아이브 멤버들의 반응 😍👑폭주기니의 인기 비결 ⭐️. 그 의미와 유래는 흥미롭고 여러 맥락에서 사용될 수 있습니다.

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.