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.

저는 키수술을 받고 161cm에서 168cm가 됐습니다. 만천하에 흉터 공개하고 싶지않은거지 여자는 150 남자는 165안 넘는거 아니면 이 리스크걸고 할 수술이절대아니다. 230 그래서 저 사람은 과거로 돌아간다면 키수술 한다는거야 안한다는거야 2022. 유도계에서 한국 국가대표 선수로서 2001 아시아 유도 선수권 대회 금메달을 땄고, 일본 국가대표 선수로서 2002 아시안게임 금메달을 땄다.

키 165 키수술 도움좀 키 수술 마이너 갤러리.. 이 페이지는 최신 트렌드에 따라 최고의 kpop 아이돌 순간을 함축한 흥미로운 짧은 영상들을 모아..

Jk메디컬교정센터 디시

Kento Ntr Pikpak

하는게 차라리 안전한데 read more. 이성이 문제가 아니라 먹고사는 생존의 문제가 걸림 학생 수준으로 작으면 첫 인상부터 신뢰감을 깍아먹고 만만하게 보여서 진행될 일도 안됨read more. 여기 원장이 키수술 환자가 겪는 고충을 잘 알고 굉장히 신경쓴다는거임.

Kate Kuray Pikpak

Kissav.com

안녕 맨날 눈팅만 하다가 나도 도움이 되고자 가입하고 후기 쓰러 들어왔슴원래 키수술갤 말고 디시를 안해서 말투는 적응.. Com › lifejump2002 › 221950459695키크는수술 3개월만에 7cm 커져서 후기 네이버 블로그.. 꼭 필요한 공통된 질문들만 간략하게 정리했습니다..

기타 질문 사항은 댓글로 달아주시면 늦지만 답변 드릴게요, 230 그래서 저 사람은 과거로 돌아간다면 키수술 한다는거야 안한다는거야 2022, 사지연장술 마이너 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털 디시인사이드.

Kissjav H

어쩌면좋을지원 사지연장술은 부작용 장난아니던데 몸속에 철심박아놓는것도 ㅂㄹ고 내년에 성전환 하거나 안하거나 둘중하나인데 고민이다, 포텐 키 작아서 연애 못한다고 아버지 토막 내야겠다고 결심한 서울대생 ㄷㄷㄷㄷㄷ. 5 20058 공지 수술 후기글 작성요령2 리브라이프 24, 이동훈 믿고 수술한 내 선택이 제발 틀리지 않고 1년후에는 거리 활보할때 깔창없어도 180cm 되기를 바랄뿐이다. 애들 노는 번화가는 안가봄그냥 연령대 다양하고 사람 많은 마트나 아울렛들 가면 대충 평균이구나 싶음나보다 큰 사람도 많지만.

kissjav 서유하 Mexwbp2ejc키수술카페 사지연장술 속성연장 프리사이스 하지부동 뉴본 네이버 카페키수술카페 사지연장술 속. Com › board › view키 수술 후기 실시간 베스트 갤러리. Redirecting to sgall. Com › lifejump2002 › 221950459695키크는수술 3개월만에 7cm 커져서 후기 네이버 블로그. 그런가 고연장러들보면 좀 걷는게 이상함. kissjav 박솔이

joylia leaked 포텐 키 작아서 연애 못한다고 아버지 토막 내야겠다고 결심한 서울대생 ㄷㄷㄷㄷㄷ. 조주빈이 키크는 수술 받으면서 만든게 n번방 연갤러 115. 난 키수술 안한 175인데 키정병 진짜 개말기다 180 이상은 되야 완전히 벗어날수 있지 않을까 돈. 사지연장술 관련 정보를 공유하고 소통하는 디시인사이드 갤러리입니다. 속성연장술 이 대한민국에서 많이 하지 않으니까 검색을 해도 병원이 많지 않아서 고르는데 선택지가 많지 않았고 뉴본정형외과 는 사례도 많아서 결정을 쉽게 했다. k-vam hitomi

kate shumskaya nude 꼭 필요한 공통된 질문들만 간략하게 정리했습니다. 키165 sky의대 vs 키185 동부산대 키 수술 마이너 갤러리. 솔직히 밖에나가면 남자취급도 못받음 옷같은거 입을때마다 제일작은사이즌데도 질질 흘러내리고 핏도 초딩처럼나오는거 진짜 보기싫음read more. 그런가 고연장러들보면 좀 걷는게 이상함. 2019년 여름이 끝나갈 무렵에 키수술 했고 불유합 부작용으로 골반뼈로 자가골 이. kemono luna_brwl

king power d porn 내가 키가 165고 지금 25살인데 어깨가 많이넓고 머리가 큼. 일본 워홀 출신으로서 말해주면 키 덜본다는 일본도 170 정도는 돼야함 그리고 무조건 얼굴이 최우선임. 이사람 14cm 수술하는데 재활 다 끝내고 고정 푸는데까지 3달걸림 심지어 일상적으로 뛰는건 몰라도 평범하게 걷고 계단오르기. 키165 sky의대 vs 키185 동부산대 키 수술 마이너 갤러리. 165 이하는 선택이 아니라 필수임 키 수술 마이너 갤러리.

kazuha deepfake sex 키 수술 갤러리에 다양한 이야기를 남겨주세요. Com › mgallery › board키 수술 마이너 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털 디시인사이드. 솔직히 밖에나가면 남자취급도 못받음 옷같은거 입을때마다 제일작은사이즌데도 질질 흘러내리고 핏도 초딩처럼나오는거 진짜 보기싫음read more. 이사람 14cm 수술하는데 재활 다 끝내고 고정 푸는데까지 3달걸림 심지어 일상적으로 뛰는건 몰라도 평범하게 걷고 계단오르기. ㅂㄷㅅㅇㄷ 속성 2000 입원비따로 ㅈㄴㄷ 2000 + 200 + 200 허벅지 2500 + 2.

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.