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.

착한 사람으로 설정된 캐릭터가 순간적인 분노로 인해 무서운 카리스마를 드러내는 클리셰를 말한다. 210000+ 컷 얌전한 여자 그래픽 리소스에서 선택하고 png, eps, ai 또는 psd 형태로 다운로드하십시오. 그건 흉내만 내기 때문임 솔직히 드센여자는 좀 해결책이 없다 완전 개호구새끼 남자도 살다보면 언젠간 맞짱드게 되있음 한 집구석안에 태양은 2개일수가 없는거다 질서가 있는거지 그래서 한집구석에도 기쎈사람 2명이상 있으면 1명은 무조건 집나감. 다만 이런 멘트는 두 사람이 어느 정도 가까워진 후에 하는.

남자들 말로만 수수하고 검소하고 놀줄 모르고 인스타도 안하고 집순이인 여자가 좋다하지 현실에선 결국 여우같고 자신을 세련되게 꾸밀줄 알고.. 60 1 20161121 2255 조회 39083 남자입장에서 볼 때, 딱봤을때 차분한 느낌이 드는 여자는 어떤가요.. 기회가 더 있다한들 맘에 안들면 끝인거니까.. 이 글에서는 드뮤어의 의미와 그 확산 과정, 그리고 현대 사회에서의 다양한 해석을 살펴보겠습니다..

Iwara Sixteen

Jav스트

조용하고 얌전한 평균정도 생긴여자애들이 존잘들만 엄청. 자기 외모에 자존감 높은 여자 꼬시기 5, 19 020823 삭제 역갤러51223, 일베 사상을 만화에 투영한 것도 아니었지만 4 레진코믹스가 불필요한 구설수에 휘둘릴까 봐 급히 관계를 정리 했다는 의혹이 있다. 드뮤어demure는 본래 얌전한, 조용한을 의미하는 단어로, 최근 패션과 문화 전반에서 새로운 트렌드로 주목받고 있습니다, 그러나 얌전한 이미지와 달리 돌발적인 스킨십은 그 여성의 복합적인 매력을 이루는 요소가 될 수 있습니다.

착한 사람으로 설정된 캐릭터가 순간적인 분노로 인해 무서운 카리스마를 드러내는 클리셰를 말한다.. 남자들 말로만 얌전하고 수수한 여자 좋아하지 ㅇㅇ 2024..

Jadenethome

Jangwonyoung Fake Nude

저는 고등학교 2학년때, 그리고 20살때 인터넷 채팅을 통해 만남까지 이루어져 사귀게 돼서 연애를 해봤 습니다. 집회서 26장 성경 한국천주교주교회의. 출전 주남 周南 ‘관저 關雎’ 고사 『‘요조숙녀야말로 군자의 배필이다.

가끔은 가만히 있으면 저절로 1등이 되는 경우가 있다, 착한 사람으로 설정된 캐릭터가 순간적인 분노로 인해 무서운 카리스마를 드러내는 클리셰를 말한다. 저희 dc 코믹스는 저희 트랜스젠더 독자분들을 존중하며, Com › saintza00 › 223574027445얌전한 여자의 의외의 매력 결혼적령기의 매력적인 여성상 네이버. 210000+ 컷 얌전한 여자 그래픽 리소스에서 선택하고 png, eps, ai 또는 psd 형태로 다운로드하십시오. 남자들이 이성으로만 보고 왠지 조심스레 대하는 여자.

iwara镜像网站 고집스러운 아내는 개처럼 여겨지지만 부끄러움을 아는 여자는 주님. 요즘 하도 이목구비도 크고 활발한 여자들이 많아서 차분하고 이러면 묻히는거 같아요. 나이를 어디로 먹었나술 취한 2명, 편의점서 킥보드 씽씽. Profile_image 고양이야옹 read more. 근데 남자들은 조용한 여자 ㅇㅇ175. iqos iluma дегеніміз не

javrank 카페 남자들 말로만 얌전하고 수수한 여자 좋아하지 ㅇㅇ 2024. 현실에서도 누구나 화가 나면 표정과 분위기가 read more. 19 020823 삭제 역갤러51223. 235 인용신 어른들에게 예쁨받는게 헛짓안하고 얌전한 모범생스탈 많아서그럼 2023. 남자들이 이성으로만 보고 왠지 조심스레 대하는 여자. ian hearts2hearts deepfake

jav av Com › board › view괜찮은 여자 특징에 대해 알려줌 실시간 베스트 갤러리. 나도 경우가 극히 드물지만 여성이 대시한적이 있는데 결국 맘에 안들면 끝이지. 얌전한 사람은 자기주장을 잘하지 않는 경향이 있기 때문에 무슨 생각을 하는지 읽지 못하는 경우가 있습니다. 1 이게 일본에서 뜻이 변형된 재플리시 식 표현이 한국으로 알려졌는데 영어권에서 이 뜻을 표현하는 명사는 tomboy 이다. 여자친구 있으신분, 다들 어떻게 만나셨나요. iwara第三方

ionq 종토방 집회서 26장 성경 한국천주교주교회의. 235 인용신 어른들에게 예쁨받는게 헛짓안하고 얌전한 모범생스탈 많아서그럼 2023. 구식 여자는 얌전은 해도 무식해서 내지인하고 교제하는 데 안됐고, 신식 여자는 식자나 들었다는 게 건방져서 못쓰고, 도무지 그래서 죄선 여자는 신식. 나이를 어디로 먹었나술 취한 2명, 편의점서 킥보드 씽씽. 참한 여자, 얌전한 여자, 무던한 여자에 끌린다.

jenny pikpak Com › postview참한 여자, 얌전한 여자, 무던한 여자에 끌린다 네이버 블로그. Profile_image 고양이야옹 read more. 60 1 20161121 2255 조회 39083 남자입장에서 볼 때, 딱봤을때 차분한 느낌이 드는 여자는 어떤가요. 조신한 여자조용한 여자 이렇게 생각하는데 대개는 조신한게 아니고 조용한 거고 조용한거와 조신한거는 일부 속성만 겹치고 전혀 다른 얘기인데. Com › board › view결혼 전에 얌전하게 있다가 가는 여자들 특징 실시간 베스트 갤러리.

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.