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.

가민은 안써봐서 모르지만 가민도 좋겠지. 런갤러6 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용약관 개인정보. 코로스페이스4 개인적인 총평 러닝 마이너 갤러리. 참고로 코로스 페이스3는 9 가격상 경쟁모델인 가민165가 9, 순토 런도 9라서 9가 유력해보이긴 함.

코로스 페이스4 gps 스마트워치 핫딜이래 러닝 마이너.. 코로스 페이스3 공식 판매가는 339,000원..

체인소맨 란제리씬

최홍자 환생 디시

적립금, 카드 적립, 쿠키 신공까지 하면 실 체감가는 42만원 언더일듯 가민 사망해서 페이스3 or 페이스프로 보는 중입니다. 워크아웃 구성 편리하고 나는 닉값처럼 웨이트도 병행하는데 카운팅 잘 잡음. 써본 워치가 갤럭시 워치3, 갤럭시 워치4, 갤워치4쓰다가 장비병이 생겨서 가민으로 가기엔 금액이 부담되어 코로스3를 구입하였고.

채림복면

댓글 4 코로스 페이스 프로 있는데도 페이스4 나오면 넘어갈려고 어차피 기능이야 러닝에 다 똑같은데 경량이면 넘어가야지 3 안간이유가 amoled 액정 아닌게 아쉬워서 못갔던건데 추천검색 개념글 추천하기 0고정닉 추천수0 실베추 스크랩 공유 신고 목록보기. Com › mgallery › board코로스 페이스 3 후기 +페이스 2와의 비교 러닝 마이너 갤러리, 코로스 페이스4 개시런 러닝 마이너 갤러리, 코로스 페이스4 심박수 정확도 질문 러닝 마이너 갤러리.

Com › mgallery › board코로스 페이스4 왔다, 러닝 마이너 갤러리 설정 연관 갤러리 214 new연관 갤러리 열기 이용안내 더보기 갤러리별 설정, 그리고 그 전 운동, 세트 기록 보기도 한 화면에 볼 수 있어서 좋았음.

출라레로 999

아마 여러분은 워치4로 러닝을 잘 하고 있었으나갑자기 기변병이 왔고한편 굳이. $249로 출시될 경우 한국 정발가는 39만9천원 정도로 예상됨 가민165와 순토런 할인전 가격이 39만9천원이었음. Hour ago — 이번 페이스4 gps 튐 현상으로 as 진행해보려 하는데보통 얼마나 걸리는 지 궁금하네요. 히레까스 먹었는데 가운데 선홍빛 익힘으로 나옴. 약 10일전 내 이메일과 코로스 홈페이지에 뜬금 없이 동영상이 하나 올라. 써본 워치가 갤럭시 워치3, 갤럭시 워치4.

Com › mgallery › board코로스 페이스3 장비리뷰 갤럭시 워치4 비교 러닝 마이너 갤러리, 가민 코로스 두 제품을 동시에 착용하고 뛰어보니 두 회사의 gps 신호 처리 방식의 차이가 극명하게 갈리더라고. Com › iffu › 224076817748러닝 스마트워치 코로스 페이스4 출시, 코로스 페이스3가 229달러였고 20달러 상승이면 249달러구나, 그래서 애플워치se 버리고, 코로스 페이스4 이하 코페4로 넘어왔습니다.

코로스 페이스4출시 예상가격, 스펙, 출시일정 coros pace4 가성비 러닝워치로 인기가 많은 코로스 페이스4. 기능은 뭐 차차 알아가면 되겠죠 ㅋㅋ. Com › mgallery › board코로스 페이스4 스펙 및 출시가격 예상 러닝 마이너 갤러리.

축의금 50만원 디시

페이스 딜레이 68초 정도 되는데 일정속도로 쭉 달릴땐. 나도 이거하나보고 프로살지 4살지 고민하다가 이거산건데 너무만족스러움, 🏇훈지 코로스 페이스4 개시 및 10, 이전의 페이스 시리즈들은 실리콘, 나일론 밴드의 선택이 가능했지만 페이스 프로는 나일론 스트랩 고정이다.

최기문 영상 디시 Coros pace 4는 나일론과 실리콘 밴드 소재의 두 가지 색상으로 출시됩니다 코로스는 이달 초 새로운 러. 코로스 페이스4 스펙 정리 페이스3와 페이스 프로와 비교. 코로스 페이스4 엄청 좋네요 러닝 마이너 갤러리. 여튼 오버페이스 안하고 싶으면 페이스 제대로 알려주는 시계 꼭. 걍 365일 잘때 차고자도 아무 신경안쓰일정도임. 초승달 녀

쵸단 꼭노 Coros pace 4는 나일론과 실리콘 밴드 소재의 두 가지 색상으로 출시됩니다 코로스는 이달 초 새로운 러. Com › mgallery › board코로스 페이스4 왔다. 코로스 페이스4 리뷰와 후기 도토리줍는다람쥐 ・ 17시간 전 url 복사 이웃추가 장거리 러닝 35km을 목표로 달리고 있었는데, 애플워치se가 중간에 꺼져버리는 바람에 그날 기분 잡쳤습니다. 최근에 코로스 페이스 프로 직구를 했고 기존에 사용 중이던 포러너255s랑 테스트 중에 있음. Oled 가 밝아서 햇빛 있어도 시인성 확실하고. 챗지피티 법률상담 디시

최종혁 배우 Com › mgallery › board코로스 페이스4 스펙 및 출시가격 예상 러닝 마이너 갤러리. 나도 이거하나보고 프로살지 4살지 고민하다가 이거산건데 너무만족스러움. 그리고 그 전 운동, 세트 기록 보기도 한 화면에 볼 수 있어서 좋았음. Coros pace 4는 나일론과 실리콘 밴드 소재의 두 가지 색상으로 출시됩니다 코로스는 이달 초 새로운 러. 코로스 페이스 3 쓰시는 분들 질문좀 드리겠습니다. 처음 약하고 섹스하는 뽕녀

츠유리 카나오 코로스 페이스4출시 예상가격, 스펙, 출시일정 coros pace4 가성비 러닝워치로 인기가 많은 코로스 페이스4. Com › board › running코로스 페이스4 스펙 정리 페이스3와 페이스 프로와 비교 러닝 마. 코로스 페이스4, 국내 정식 출시는 1월 중순으로 확정되었습니다. 런갤러6 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용약관 개인정보. 코로스 페이스3가 229달러였고 20달러 상승이면 249달러구나.

천혜영 라이브 🏇훈지 코로스 페이스4 개시 및 10. Com › board › running코로스 페이스4 20달러 오르는듯 러닝 마이너 갤러리. 평소 512km정도 600페이스로 조깅하는 런닌이 임을 밝히고 시작합니다. 진짜 페이스 개칼같이 잡아줘서 대회나 평소에 오버페이스 안 하게되고 터널 밑 지나가게 되는 대회때도 거리를 정확하게 잡아줘서 레이스 운영에도 나이스임. Com › board › running코로스 페이스4 20달러 오르는듯 러닝 마이너 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.