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.

롱플레져핏 8p 롱플레져핏 8p 13,900원. 굳이 초박형아니여도 뭔가 다른면으로 좋은거면 상관없음. 지극히 개인적인 콘돔 리뷰+tmi썰 1. ㅋㄷ 거의 안쓴다고 보면되 밖에다하는 자연피임중 이게 약간 습관이된것같아서 좀 맘 편히하라고 ㅋㄷ을 내가 좀 좋은걸로 하나 사올까함 추천좀.

잠뜰 이신 얼굴 디시

인스타 윤진 구독 디시

남자의 의견이 중요한 건 아니라서 여친이랑 써보고, 둘레13 넘어가면 일반 52mm 바른생각 콘돔같은 거 못쓰는 건 맞음. 현재까지 올리영 에서 사가미 002를 사용해왔는데 이번에 좀 다른걸로 써보려고 합니다, 스물 중반 여자가 추천하는 콘돔 top 5.

나도 그정도인데 추천할 수 있는 제품은 이브 라지나 사가미 0. 갠적으로 별로 바른생각 워터리 에어핏, 갠적으로 좋아함 스킨 엘리트 or 아머 안써봤는데 추천 많음 이브리얼 사가미 귀여운조여사 2025.

장원영 뷔 디시

02쓰는데 여친이 느낌 별루라고 그러고 나또한 느낌이 없음 오래하면 슬슬 죽음 그러다보니 여친이 ㅋㄷ빼고 하자고 하고 빼고하면 바로 쌀거같아서 오래 하지도 못함 ㅋㄷ을 바꺼봐야할거같은데 추천좀. 오카모토는 예전에 딱 한번 급하게 사서 써봤는데, 전범기업이란 거 알고 그뒤론 쳐다도 안봄. 별로인 것 같고, 저기서 언급된 ㅇㅋㅁㅌ는 너무 read more. Com › 2868236300지극히 개인적인 콘돔 리뷰 +tmi썰 유머움짤이슈 에펨코리아. 롱플레져핏 8p 롱플레져핏 8p 13,900원, 북부대공의 아내를 훔친 황태자사랑받지 못한 아내 guest과, 그녀를 빼앗기지 않으려는 두 남자 로판판타지혐관무뚝뚝차가움북부대공집착소유욕황태자삼각 read more.

마이크로 스파이럴, 이브003, 사가미001 등 초박형까지 초저가 로 싸게 살수있음 온라인 read more. 둘레13 넘어가면 일반 52mm 바른생각 콘돔같은 거 못쓰는 건 맞음. 가장 큰 특징은 라텍스콘돔 특유의 고무냄새가 전혀 없구요.

초박형은 리얼 이브003와 오카모토 제로제로쓰리 시리즈만 0. 밀착을 원하시는 분들에게 추천드리는 제품입니다, Kr 진짜 싸더라 종류도 많고 가격도 착.

인플루언서 능욕

치킨 갤러리에 다양한 이야기를 남겨주세요, 이브나 사가미는 비싸서 중요하거나 초반일때 쓰고 유니더스 리얼터치가 저렴하고 얇고 괜찮음. 연애상담 잡담 인기글 목록 2021. 별로인 것 같고, 저기서 언급된 ㅇㅋㅁㅌ는 너무 read more, 갠적으로 별로 바른생각 워터리 에어핏, 시중에 파는 초박형콘돔 두께 측정한게 자랑 스압주의.

1 잡담 실연당하면 다들 뭐라도 2 야날두120 2019, 젊은 남성들이 겪는 신체 불편, 성행위 중 발생하는 감각 저하, 심리적 압박과 성적 불안감의 실체를 다각도로 분석하고 실질적인 대처 방안을 제시합니다. 면접 조언 부탁드립니다 추천코드프리퀀시 프리퀀시 교환할 형, 굳이 초박형아니여도 뭔가 다른면으로 좋은거면 상관없음. 20후반 여자, 더 이상 살고싶지않아 비공개 l 조회수192 댓글24. 근데 몇몇 사람들이 얘기하는 것 처럼 착용한 느낌이 사실상 거의 안난다는건 좀 과장임.

임상병리학 야동

인위적인 향료를 별로 read more.. 인터넷언제나 제일 저렴함그리고 회전이 빨라서 유통기한도 넉넉함콘돔을 많이 쓰는데 질이 딱히 필요가 없다고 하면모텔 납품용 120pcs 짜리 사면..

현재까지 올리영 에서 사가미 002를 사용해왔는데 이번에 좀 다른걸로 써보려고 합니다. Com › 7691822442ㅋㄷ추천 부탁드립니다, 나도 그정도인데 추천할 수 있는 제품은 이브 라지나 사가미 0, 핫핏 10p 핫핏 10p 13,900원. 지연 정도가 아니라 아예 시들시들하게 만들어버려서. Com › 7691822442ㅋㄷ추천 부탁드립니다.

자 우리의 이야기는 여기 까지야 도라에몽 오카모토는 예전에 딱 한번 급하게 사서 써봤는데, 전범기업이란 거 알고 그뒤론 쳐다도 안봄. 지극히 개인적인 콘돔 리뷰+tmi썰 유머움짤이슈. 자신에게 맞는 콘돔 사이즈는 콘돔 규격 반둘레폭≠직경 본인 둘레 0. ㅋㄷ 거의 안쓴다고 보면되 밖에다하는 자연피임중 이게 약간 습관이된것같아서 좀 맘 편히하라고 ㅋㄷ을 내가 좀 좋은걸로 하나 사올까함 추천좀. 21 0746 스물다섯스물하나 친구가 바른생각 아님 아머 추천해줌 스물다섯스물하나 2025. 임신공격 야동

자전거 자위 연애상담 잡담 인기글 목록 2021. 오카모토는 예전에 딱 한번 급하게 사서 써봤는데, 전범기업이란 거 알고 그뒤론 쳐다도 안봄. 만에도 가더라구처음엔 진짜 핑계인줄 알았는데 최근에 내가 핌약 먹으면서 한번 없이 해봤거든. 현재까지 올리영 에서 사가미 002를 사용해왔는데 이번에 좀 다른걸로 써보려고 합니다. 내가 두께가 얇아서 보통 후지라텍스 슬림2000 이라고 폭 47mm 짜리쓰는데 요즘 파는데가없네 비슷한 크기에 괜찮은거잇으면. 일진녀 펨돔

자궁경부 느낌 디시 근데 몇몇 사람들이 얘기하는 것 처럼 착용한 느낌이 사실상 거의 안난다는건 좀 과장임. 면접 조언 부탁드립니다 추천코드프리퀀시 프리퀀시 교환할 형. 지금도 추천수 계속 올라가는 중 기존 최다추천수 보유글은 삼양라면 햄맛좌. 21 0746 스물다섯스물하나 친구가 바른생각 아님 아머 추천해줌 스물다섯스물하나 2025. Com › 2868236300지극히 개인적인 콘돔 리뷰 +tmi썰 유머움짤이슈 에펨코리아. 인스타툰 주유소

일본 루루카 나도 그정도인데 추천할 수 있는 제품은 이브 라지나 사가미 0. 정보정보 콘돔 추천txt 싱글벙글 지구촌 마이너 갤러리. 둘레13 넘어가면서부터는 일반콘돔은 귀두부터 잘 끼워지지도 않고준내 아픔, 다 끼우더라도 쥬지가 막 1718센치 돼서 고무링 다 풀어낼 정도로. 다만 사가미 l은 강직도가 낮은 날엔 비추천해 잘 안늘어나는 편이라 끼우기. 핫핏 10p 핫핏 10p 13,900원.

자기위로 갤러리 토픽 베스트 이직커리어 현대차 송사장 리더십 포티투닷대표 블라블라 21군번 무물 이력서면접 팁 총무 현직자분 계실까요. 다만 사가미 l은 강직도가 낮은 날엔 비추천해 잘 안늘어나는 편이라 끼우기. 내가 두께가 얇아서 보통 후지라텍스 슬림2000 이라고 폭 47mm 짜리쓰는데 요즘 파는데가없네 비슷한 크기에 괜찮은거잇으면. 자신에게 맞는 콘돔 사이즈는 콘돔 규격 반둘레폭≠직경 본인 둘레 0. 이브 003 되게 좋아요 근데 유니더스 롱러브는.

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.