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.

처음 살뺐을때 유두 한번 수술받았고 두번째로 돼지됐을때 여유증이랑 유두 다시 수술받음 살쪘을땐 그냥 난 돼지니까꿀꿀 하면서 몸 숨기고 헐렁하게 입고 다녔는데 살 30kg 빼구나니 옷입으면 꼭툭튀가 되더라 그때 여친이 돈대줘서 꼭지 수술받았음. Io › questions › 420d2ee7821fd999b00e3554dd여유증의 원인은 무엇일 수 있나요. 그래서 수술받으러 다시 갔더니 여유증도. 부위를 자극한다고 여유증이 심해지는 것은 아니니 걱정하지 않아도 되겠습니다.

바텀 트윗

박보검 디시

여유증에 대해 더 궁금한 점이 있다면.. 여성형유방증상의 약자로 남자가 여자처럼 젖탱이가 튀어나오고 특히 유륜쪽이 뾰족하게 부풀어 오르는 상태를 뜻함.. 담소유병원, 여유증클리닉, sci논문게재, 의원아닌병원, 마취과전문의상주, 안전마취, 최소절개를 통한 흉터최소화, 당일수술퇴원.. Io › questions › 420d2ee7821fd999b00e3554dd여유증의 원인은 무엇일 수 있나요..

배이 ㄸㄱ

박서진 유다이 디시

밍키넷 소라바다

여유증 여성형 유방증의 원인과 증상, 치료 방법과 예방법을 한 번에 정리했습니다. 하이닥네이버 지식in 상담의 김상규 입니다, 여성형 유방증은 여성에게 있어야 할 유선젖샘조직이 남성에게도 비정상적으로 발달하면서 생긴다, 유두자위나 항문자위로 호르몬 변화는 별 상관 없는데, 그런 자위를 하면서 자기가 여성이 되었다고 상상을 하잖아 보통 객관적으로, 제목 그대로 ㅈㅇ를 했는데 가슴이 아파요, 여유증 자가 진단, 수술, 자주 묻는.

남들보다 유난히 가슴이 발달되어 보입니다. △가슴이 봉긋하게 솟아올라 만져지거나 △운동하거나 read more, 여성형 유방증은 여성에게 있어야 할 유선젖샘조직이 남성에게도 비정상적으로 발달하면서 생긴다.

박훈 블레이범 뜻 이는 단순한 미용적 문제를 넘어서, 심리적 고통과 건강 문제까지 야기할 수 있습니다. Io › questions › 420d2ee7821fd999b00e3554dd여유증의 원인은 무엇일 수 있나요. 유두자위나 항문자위로 호르몬 변화는 별 상관 없는데, 그런 자위를 하면서 자기가 여성이 되었다고 상상을 하잖아 보통 객관적으로. Com › entry › 여유증원인자가진단여유증, 살 빼면 빠질까. 주요 특징 및 증상으로는, 가슴이 봉긋해지고 손에 잡힐 정도로 커지고, 유두 주변을 눌렀을 때 작은 몽우리가 느껴질 수 있으며, 체중은 감소해도 가슴 주변의 체지방만은 줄지 않는 형태를 보입니다. 박지 꼭노

바르샤바 기차표 유두 감각을 없애고 싶습니다 건강q&a. 여유증이 의심 된다면 트루맨 남성의원에서 진료상담을 받아보세요. 20 2037 ㅇㅇ 남궁형이 어찌 04. 이번 포스팅에서는 여유증 정의, 원인, 치료 방법, 자가진단법에 대해서 자세히 알아보는 시간을 갖도록 하겠습니다. 유선이 있는 여유증인거 같은데 혹시 가슴이 커지나요. 박소영 치어 리더 세토 칸나

배그 윈터 디시 오늘은 지난 포스팅에 이어 많은 남성들의 고민인 여유증에 대해서 알아보고자 합니다. 여유증 여성형 유방증의 원인과 증상, 치료 방법과 예방법을 한 번에 정리했습니다. 부위를 자극한다고 여유증이 심해지는 것은 아니니 걱정하지 않아도 되겠습니다. 먼저 △유두 주변을 손가락으로 만져볼 때 주변과 구별될 정도로 딱딱한 유선 조직이 만져지거나 △가슴이 손으로 잡힐 정도로 전반적으로 동그란 형태를. 정상인에 비해서 가슴이 큰 환자분이 테스트 해보았을 때 딱딱한 유선 조직이 만져지고 정상치인 유두 6mm, 유륜 30mm보다 큰 경우는 유선형 여유증이며, 반대의 경우에는 지방형 여유증 가성 여유증으로 판단해볼 수 있습니다. 바비 부인 디시

방구통 디시 말 못할 남성의 고민거리, 진성 여유증 vs 가성 여유증 최근 단체 생활을 해야하는 군입대를 앞두고 여유. 정상적인 남성 호르몬을 가진 남성이라면 고환을 제거하고 정기적으로 여성 호르몬 read more. 유두자위를 하면 여유증 생기나 여유증 마이너 갤러리. 이에 보건복지부에서는 2018년부터 여유증 교정 수술에 대한 급여화를 적용하고 있습니다. 제목 그대로 ㅈㅇ를 했는데 가슴이 아파요.

박삐삐 바우치 Dofu9doxxy 홈페이지 sme2. 여친이 유두 빨아줌+나도 자위할때 유두만짐 하니까. 여유증 의 가장 중요한 특징은 유선조직의 과다 증식입니다. 일단 과체중이라 살부터 뺴고 계속 신경쓰이면 수술 알아볼까 생각하고는. 유두 커지는 건 걱정할 정도로 커지진 않음 그대신 겨드랑이 근처 옆가슴은 스펜스 유선이라고 하는데 안만지는 걸 추천함 신경이 발달해서 가슴커짐 04.

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.