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.

그래미서 쫓겨났다 비앙카 센소리, 도 넘은 올누드 패션 충격. 와 는 둘은 2년간의 결혼 생활을 마치고 최근 이혼 변호사에게 연락했다고 밝혔는데요. 어머니 돈다 웨스트 1949년 7월 12일 2007년 11월 10일. 비앙카 센소리는 투명하고 얇은 천 하나로 몸을 가린 상태였다.

나는 다채로운 래핑과 라이밍 디시

나기 히카루 화보

Yeezy의 건축 책임자인 비앙카 센소리 ​.. 스페셜타임스 정시환 기자미국 로스앤젤레스에서 제67회 그래미 어워즈가 열리는 가운데, 칸예 웨스트와 그의 아내 비앙카 센소리가 레드카펫에 등장하며 이목을 집중시켰다..

나람이 키

비앙카 센소리 칸예 웨스트와 결혼 후 파격적인 패션으로 많은 이들에게 관심 받기 시작합니다. 아무도 없는데도 사진 보고 화들짝 함, 매거진이 비앙카 센소리가 만들어낸 무언의 진풍경에 의문을 가졌다, 이번 그래미 어워즈는 크립토닷컴 아레나에서 열렸으며, 비앙카 센소리는 과감한 패션으로 주목을 받았다. 칸예 웨스트55의 아내 비앙카 센소리48가 제67회 그래미 어워드 레드카펫에 과감한 의상으로 등장해 전 세계의 눈길을 끌었다. 비앙카 센소리는 원래 미니멀한 스타일을 선호했다.

관련기사 w fashion 아빠에게 호되게 혼난 비앙카 센소리, 비포 vs 애프터 w fashion 말문이 막히는 칸예와 비앙카 센소리의 근황 최신기사 올겨울엔 파마할까, 다만 비앙카 센소리 본인의 자의 여부와 관계없이 해당 의상 자체만으로도 굉장히 부적절하다는 의견이 많다, 지난 2일현지 시간 미국 로스앤젤레스 크립토닷컴 아레나에서 제76회 그래미 어워드가 개최됐다, 이해하기 힘든 비앙카 센소리 패션, 프로필과 인스타까지, 사실 결혼 이전부터 원래 파격적인 옷을 즐겨 입었단다, 후방주의비앙카 옷 꼬라지보소 칸예 웨스트 마이너 갤러리.

꽃자 카광 칸예가 아내 비앙카 센소리에게 알몸 원피스를 입힌 이유. 엘라 비주얼로 맥심 콘테스트 돌풍 변호사 선임, 공정한 법적 절차를 위한 필수 요소. 20240713_칸예 웨스트와 비키니. Com › freeboard › 97463938비앙카 센소리 직업 인스타 결혼 전 평범했던 과거 그래미 패션 근황. 원래 미디어 노출이 없던 인물이었는데, 칸예와 결혼 이후 매체를 통해 알려지게 된 케이스다. 김유연 과거사진

나나 갤 원래 미디어 노출이 없던 인물이었는데, 칸예와 결혼 이후 매체를 통해 알려지게 된 케이스다. Com › 381비앙카 센소리 인스타 패션 사진 모음. 논란의 끝은 어디로칸예 웨스트, 아내를 조종했나. 비앙카 센소리의 모습이 많은 사람에게 다소 충격을 주고 있는데요, 비앙카는 검은색 퍼 코트를 착용한 채 입장했지만 레드카펫에서. 기존에 해왔던대로 비앙카 센소리 가 인스타그램 28 사진과 파파라치 샷을 중심으로 활동하며 뮤즈 격의 역할을 지속할 것으로 보인다. 꿈속 에 버 튜버 얼굴

나리 땽 성형 전 아무도 없는데도 사진 보고 화들짝 함. 킴 카다시안 2014년 결혼 2022년 이혼 비앙카 센소리 2022년 재혼. 관련기사 w fashion 아빠에게 호되게 혼난 비앙카 센소리, 비포 vs 애프터 w fashion 말문이 막히는 칸예와 비앙카 센소리의 근황 최신기사 올겨울엔 파마할까. 비앙카 센소리, 가려진 칸예 웨스트와 함께 그래미 시상식 레드 카펫에서 알몸으로 등장. 와 는 둘은 2년간의 결혼 생활을 마치고 최근 이혼 변호사에게 연락했다고 밝혔는데요. 김현영 디시

김프 로 은비 야코 라고 원덬이 말해놓고는 본인 의사결정권 없이 옷입고 힘들어하고 무리한 가슴 확대수술 받은 이상한 사람으로 프레이밍해서 궁예하고 있는 거. 다만 비앙카 센소리 본인의 자의 여부와 관계없이 해당 의상 자체만으로도 굉장히 부적절하다는 의견이 많다. 비앙카 센소리느슨해진 노출패션에 긴장감을 줘. 예는 이혼 합의금으로 500만 달러를 지불하기로 했다고 하죠. 그러나 포토월에서 포즈를 취하던 중 비앙카 센소리는 외투를 벗어던지더니 올 누드를 공개해 모두를 놀라게 했다.

꼭 노한 아이돌 미국 래퍼 칸예 웨스트의 아내 비앙카 센소리가 ‘그래미 어워드’ 레드카펫 행사에서 올누드 차림으로 등장해 화제다. 다만 비앙카 센소리 본인의 자의 여부와 관계없이 해당 의상 자체만으로도 굉장히 부적절하다는 의견이 많다. 17일현지시간 데일리메일에 따르면 비앙카 센소리는 최근 interview 매거진과의 인터뷰를 통해 자신이. 아무도 없는데도 사진 보고 화들짝 함. 칸예 웨스트 와이프 비앙카 센소리 투명드레스는 실제 파는.

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.