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.

한성대 7번 출구에서 도보 약 10분 거리 위치. ♥ 더 빠르고 다양한 버거 리뷰는 인스타그램 @burger_vely 에서 확인해 주세요 ♥ 버거리 신촌점 서울특별시 서대문구 신촌로 878 1층. 생긴지 얼마안된 신생브랜드라 매장이 많진 않지만 대구, 하남, 건대, 인천송도, 양산, 시흥, 홍대 등에도 대략 9개 정도의 버거리 체인점이 있다고 하니까 맛있는 버거리 버거를 맛보고 싶으시다면 근처 매장을 방문 해보셔도 좋을 것 같아요. 살짝 오일리 하다 생각할 수 있지만, 100% 소고기 패티를 사용하여 풍미가 끝내주는 햄버거 프랜차이즈.

유시후 여자친구

원피스 1110

버거리 버거, 서울 수제버거 맛집 클래식 치즈 버거 햄버거 좋아하세요.. Com › galintanamu › photos哪木姐姐首爾說故事나무언니 首爾弘大 弘大美食 弘大漢堡 我釜山.. 3 좋아요 수제버거 저렴히 먹을수 있긴한데 세트로 먹으니까 가격은 꽤나 나오네여ㅠㅠ 01..

윈터 니이

육즙 가득한 진한 패티와 부드러운 햄버거 번의 조화가 대박인 곳. 좀 어설픈 프랜차이즈들은 고기 패티가 너무 기름, 버거리 메뉴로는 다양한 버거들이 있는데 오리지널 프레시 버거는 단돈 4,900원으로 저렴한 가격에 먹을 수 있어요. 미국 햄버거의 맛을 느끼고 싶다면 여기를 추천합니다. 아메리칸 수제버거 버거리, 100호점 오픈 달성.

창밖 너머로 지나가는 행인들과 눈 마주치면 뻘줌하지 않으련지, 다양한 정보를 소개해주는 프리미엄it입니다. Com › postview버거리전메뉴 버거순위 매기기 top11. 버거리는 프랜차이즈 전문 기업 ㈜보승에프앤비에서 운영하고 있는 아메리칸 스타일의 가성비 수제버거 전문점으로 대형 프랜차이즈 버거의 가성비와, 버거리는 직접 매장에서 손수 조리한 100% 소고기 패티와 신선하고 퀄리티 높은 식재료를 활용해 아메리칸 스타일 수제 햄버거를 선보이는 전문점.

유디 야코

전주맛집 전주효자동맛집 신시가지맛집 신시가지점심추천 햄버거 수제버거 전주수제버거 버거리 버거리전북도청점 도청햄버거집 수제버거버거리 소고기패티 브리오슈번 통모짜치즈버거 햄버거해장 햄버거집추천 댓글 1 인쇄.. 수제 버거 맛집🍔 맛집리뷰 버거리버거 버거리 수제버거 수제버거맛집 mukbang shorts kfood 신상 신상리뷰 bbori buff 뽀리 버프 8..

그리고 순위를 매기는 기준은 공식적인게 아니라 완전히 내마음대로이다. 점심으로 먹었지만 든든해서 따로 간식이 생각 안나더라고요 수제버거인데 4900원부터 시작이라 가성비좋은 안산햄버거맛집 버거리 안산그랑시티자이점 추천합니다 안산사동맛집 그랑시티자이맛집 상록구맛집 안산수제버거 안산햄버거 0 인쇄. 🍔🍟 함께하면 매일매일 행복할거에요, 버거리 burgerry @기억지도 버거리 첫 방문 햄버거. 점심으로 먹었지만 든든해서 따로 간식이 생각 안나더라고요 수제버거인데 4900원부터 시작이라 가성비좋은 안산햄버거맛집 버거리 안산그랑시티자이점 추천합니다 안산사동맛집 그랑시티자이맛집 상록구맛집 안산수제버거 안산햄버거 0 인쇄, Com › profile버거리 신촌점 신촌 수제버거, 버거 맛집 다이닝코드.

원피스 1104화

그리고 순위를 매기는 기준은 공식적인게 아니라 완전히 내마음대로이다. 음료수까지 무한리필 수제버거집┃crispy bacon cheese burgerkorean street food. Com › @burgerry_kr버거리 공식 유튜브 youtube. 서울특별시 마포구 어울마당로 1231 홍대수제버거 홍대버거리 버거리홍대 홍대수제버거맛집 홍대가성비맛집 홍대햄버거 홍대맛집 버거리칼로리 버거리메뉴 버거리햄버거 핫치폴레버거 쉬림프버거 버거리쉬림프칼로리 버거리버거칼로리 0 댓글 쓰기, 버거리burgerry 창업 플랫폼 마이프차.

울산 마타이 마포구청에 위치한 버거리 마포구청 소개할게요. 대표 메뉴인 버거리 버거 6,900원, 소불고기 버거 5,200원, 쉬림프 버거 5,800원, 에그 베이컨 버거 7,900원, 핫 치폴레 버거 7,300원. 이번엔 방문한 버거리 햄버거는 시흥센트럴점에 있어요. 살짝 오일리 하다 생각할 수 있지만, 100% 소고기 패티를 사용하여 풍미가 끝내주는 햄버거 프랜차이즈. 버거리는 아메리칸 스타일 버거로 매장에서 만든 100% 소고기 패티와 핵심재료들을 직접 구워 판매하는 가성비 수제버거집이다. 운파 사재기

원영 쩍벌 마진이 좋다 10평대 매장에서 1억6천 매출. 마포구청에 위치한 버거리 마포구청 소개할게요. 마진이 좋다 10평대 매장에서 1억6천 매출. 3587 followers, 35 following, 565 posts 버거리 @burgerry_kr on instagram everyday, happy burgerrys day. 아메리칸 수제버거 버거리, 100호점 오픈 달성. 웨이터 알바

유리조아 방귀 버거리 burgerry @기억지도 버거리 첫 방문 햄버거. 첨단 저녁맛집 버거리 광주첨단2지구점에서 햄버거 데이트. Burgerry 버거리 매일 매장에서 직접 만든 100% 소고기 패티를 주문과 동시에 그릴에 구워 육향과. 가성비 좋은 수제버거 맛집 버거리 네이버 블로그 먹방맛집추천 212개의 글 목록열기. 생긴지 얼마안된 신생브랜드라 매장이 많진 않지만 대구, 하남, 건대, 인천송도, 양산, 시흥, 홍대 등에도 대략 9개 정도의 버거리 체인점이 있다고 하니까 맛있는 버거리 버거를 맛보고 싶으시다면 근처 매장을 방문 해보셔도 좋을 것 같아요. 웨이터 나라

운파이 불고기 디시 ㅏㅈ던 중 수제버거라고 적혀 있어서 방문. 생긴지 얼마안된 신생브랜드라 매장이 많진 않지만 대구, 하남, 건대, 인천송도, 양산, 시흥, 홍대 등에도 대략 9개 정도의 버거리 체인점이 있다고 하니까 맛있는 버거리 버거를 맛보고 싶으시다면 근처 매장을 방문 해보셔도 좋을 것 같아요. 3587 followers, 35 following, 565 posts 버거리 @burgerry_kr on instagram everyday, happy burgerrys day. 다양한 정보를 소개해주는 프리미엄it입니다. 버거리 미아점의 좋은점은 저녁12시까지 운영을해서 야식으로 먹기에도 딱이에요.

윈터 네임드 더쿠 3 홍대앞 산책 나왔다가 버거가 먹고 싶어. 서울특별시 성북구 동소문로 35 1층. 이번 주제는 버거리 메뉴와 가격에 대해서 알려드리고자 합니다. 신규 오픈 매장 버거리 한양대점 open. 버거리 미아점의 좋은점은 저녁12시까지 운영을해서 야식으로 먹기에도 딱이에요.

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.