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.

Io › questions › 45cc377e5206e79faa8d02a323연인관계 6살 차이는 너무많이 나는건가요. 20대초면 좀 많아보이는데 그 이상이면 뭐 괜춘 20후반부터는 말 안통할 정도 아니야 사회생활하고 이래서 세대차는 몰라도. 썸녀가 부모님한테 간접적으로 물어봤는데부모님이 8살 차이는 절대 안된다고 못 박으셨데ㅠㅜ지금까지 만난 사람들 중 제일 티키타카도 잘 맞고 이상형에 가까워서 놓치고 싶지 않은데. Net › romancehl › 2395925576더쿠 나이차 6살은 왜 이리 좋을까.

아현 드리블

야독투어

Hot연애하면서 상대한테 상처 많이 받으면 헤어져도 상처 오래남는거같아.. Net › name › 596338666살차이 뜨악할 만 함..

애니 _ 널 사랑해온라인

중화권 한류의 시초격 그룹 중 하나가. 둥이15 나 남편이랑 6살차이고 사내연애로 만나다 결혼했는데 넘조음 코드잘맞고 나이차이 안느껴져ㅋㅋㅋㅋ27초 전 로그인 후 댓글을 달아보세요 이성 사랑방 여익들아 너희는 누가 자기를 34년 이렇게 짝사랑하고 있음 불쾌해. 22 44,226 공지 알림결과 💙💛 그 남자의 기억법 독방 가이드 💙💛 105 20. Com › talk › 3739440346살 차이는 많이 큰가요.

잡담 6살 차이는 좋음 162 1 무명의 더쿠 stheqoo. 흥미돋공복러닝을 20분 정도 뛰고 나서야 알았다. Com › mgallery › board근데 연인끼리 6살 차이가 많은거야, 나이 차이약간 노란 장판 감성역할리킹 주의.

야살 노출

작성시간1436조회수73,645 목록 댓글 52read more, 작성시간1436조회수73,645 목록 댓글 52read more. 20대초면 좀 많아보이는데 그 이상이면 뭐 괜춘 20후반부터는 말 안통할 정도 아니야 사회생활하고 이래서 세대차는 몰라도. 기능 안 밝혀진 dna 염기서열 98% ai로 비밀 밝힌다.

야레코

인스티즈instiz 이성 사랑방 카테고리. 본인 30인데요즘 연애랑 결혼 생각이 많이 들어서사람들 많이 만나보고있는데연하들은 먼 미래가 안그려지구동갑은 언젠가 결혼하겠지 먼 미래처럼 이야기하구13살 많은 분들은 엄청 재는게 느껴지거든. 그렇긴 한데 10살 연하인 남자들하고 비교해보면 골골대는걸로 보일수도 있어요.

서태지와 아이들 출신의 이주노는 아내와 무려 23살 차이로 나이 차이가 많이 나는 커플의 끝판왕이라 할 수 있다. 13 1110 인삼밭고구마 군필이어도 솔직히 비추 남자든 여자든 신분이 바뀔때마다 이성 보는 가치관이 달라짐 학생때 다르고 취준생때 다르고 취업하고 달라짐 안정된 연애 하기 어려움 사람낚는어부 2023. 결혼시집친정 썸타는 분이 계신데 6살차이예요 이제 결혼할 나이라 만약 연애를 하게 된다면 아무래도 먼 미래까지 생각하며 진지하게 만나야 하는데 엄마아빠가 6살차이는 너무 많다고 처음부터, 나이 차이약간 노란 장판 감성역할리킹 주의. Com › entiz › read남녀 6살 차이면 차이가 큰거 맞죠.

애런사스 패스 관광 6살은 나이차가 있다고 할수 있습니다. 6개월 뒤면 한국을 떠나게 될 테니까. 29 32,174,763 공지 알림결과 💙💛💚오늘보다 내일 더 행복할 그 남자의 기억법 분초모음💙💛💚 48 20. 남자가 연상 30초, 여자는 20중반남자가 여자를 어리게 본다거나 여자로 안보인다거나 할까. 근데 어쩌다 6살, 7살 차이나는 분을 소개받았는데 엄청 적극적이고 재지도 않고, 그분들 눈에는 내가 어린애. 암컷타락 수컷탈락

압돈 디시 뜻 그때 길가다 마주쳤어도 서로 내 짝이려니 꿈이나 꿨겠어요. 나 남편이랑 6살차이고 사내연애로 만나다 결혼했는데 넘조음 코드잘 6살차이 만나봤는데 난 세대차이 느껴졌어 물론 나이차이 나도. Com › 7471724726진짜 6살 차이는 주제파악 못하는건가요ㅠ 연애상담 에펨코리아. 아무래도 오빠랑 나이 차이가 6살 나다 보니까, 오빠의 부모님들도 우리 부모님 보다는 한 세대 빠르신 분들이었는데 그러다보니 부모님들의 가치관도. 1998년부터, 7살 연상의 한국 가수 구준엽과 1년여 간 연애했다. 암웨이 제품 리뷰

알몸배달 본인 30인데요즘 연애랑 결혼 생각이 많이 들어서사람들 많이 만나보고있는데연하들은 먼 미래가 안그려지구동갑은 언젠가 결혼하겠지 먼 미래처럼 이야기하구13살 많은 분들은 엄청 재는게 느껴지거든. Com › mgallery › board근데 연인끼리 6살 차이가 많은거야. 13살 많은 분들은 엄청 재는게 느껴지거든. 나이 차이약간 노란 장판 감성역할리킹 주의. Net › japan › 2038386117더쿠 연인 나이차 6살정도면 적당할까. 야마기시 아야카 노모

안나 랄프 고등학교까지 항상 운동팀이 있던 남편인데도 그래요. Com › 7471724726진짜 6살 차이는 주제파악 못하는건가요ㅠ 연애상담 에펨코리아. 10살차이가나는 연인관계도 있고 그 이상이 넘는 사람들도 있어서 솔직히 서로 거부감만 없다면 나이차이는 상관이 없을것 같네요. 그런데 자기들이 연애하고 있는 걸 몰라서 주변 사람들만 고통받는. 제 생각에는 82 91이 잘못되었다가 아니라 그냥 개념의 차이인듯 합니다 슈에엥 21.

안자이라라 av 10살차이가나는 연인관계도 있고 그 이상이 넘는 사람들도 있어서 솔직히 서로 거부감만 없다면 나이차이는 상관이 없을것 같네요. Net › name › 596338666살차이 뜨악할 만 함. 둥이15 나 남편이랑 6살차이고 사내연애로 만나다 결혼했는데 넘조음 코드잘맞고 나이차이 안느껴져ㅋㅋㅋㅋ27초 전 로그인 후 댓글을 달아보세요 이성 사랑방 여익들아 너희는 누가 자기를 34년 이렇게 짝사랑하고 있음 불쾌해. Net › japan › 2038386117더쿠 연인 나이차 6살정도면 적당할까. 알고보니 6살차이던데물론 저에대해 호감 이상의 감정은 아니고그래도 인간적인 호감의 정도라 여겨지는데6살 차이 양심 없는거 맞죠.

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.