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.

파킹통장과 다르게 현금화를 하려면 2영업일이 소요되는 점도 유의하시면 좋겠습니다. Kr › product › etfkodex cd금리액티브 합성 수익률 확인 funetf. 지금까지 은행의 양도성 예금증서인 cd금리에 투자하면서 매일 이자를 쌓아주는 kodex cd금리 액티브 etf 를 살펴보았습니다. 최근엔 cd금리액티브가 배당주는 형식으로 바뀌어버려서 tr형태 아직 남아있는걸로 이사한 사람도 있음.

Twstalker.com Chudai

Cd금리 뜻 cd는 양도성예금증서 certificate of deposit의 약자로, 은행이 발행하는 만기가 정해진 예금증서입니다.. 02%였으나 최근 ‘tiger 1년은행양도성예금증서액티브 합성’가 수수료를 기존 0.. Cd 금리액티브 살때도 바로 안사지더니 뺄때도 바로 안빼져서 답답했던적있는데 필요할때 바로바로 쓸려면 그냥 현금으로들고있..

Wagashi 근황

증권계좌를 적금처럼 활용해 보자 cd금리 etf 어차피 투자할 돈이라면 파킹통장 사용하세요. Sol cd금리&머니마켓액티브 etf는 기초지수의 단기금리를 복리로 계산해 이자가 나오는 파킹통장 etf다. 5상품 대신 kodex cd 금리액티브를 사는건. ace cd금리&초단기채권액티브 etf 9일 상장매경kap 개발 지수 추종cdcp초단기채 분산투자연 4% 수익률 목표안갯속 증시 투자 대안으로언제든 원할 때 매수매도단기유휴자금 운용에 최적퇴직연금 100% 편입도 가능고금리 상황서 주목할만, 최근 isa 개정 소식으로 인해 절세계좌의 관심이 뜨겁습니다. 예금상품같은거 구매하면 좋다라고 kodex cd금리액티브를 소개받아서 isa계좌 개설했는데 개설하면 그 년에는 2천만원만 입금된다해서 마침 예금 가입하려던거랑 금액이 맞물리더라구요 kodex cd 금리액티브 이게 혹시 예금상품처럼 쭉 오르는 상품이 맞을까요.

퇴직연금 안전자산 kodex cd금리액티브합성 파킹형 etf. Ace cd금리&초단기채권액티브 etf의 기초 정보는 다음과 같습니다. Kodex cd 금리 액티브 사려는데 자산 배분 마이너 갤러리.

최근엔 cd금리액티브가 배당주는 형식으로 바뀌어버려서 tr형태 아직 남아있는걸로 이사한 사람도 있음, Kodexcd금리액티브 더 알아보기kodexcd금리액티브는 국내 채권 시장의 단기금리를 추종하는 etf로, 안정적이고 꾸준한 수익률을 추구하는 투자자들에게 적합한 상품입니다. 호가창에 50만개씩 쌓여있고 그런데 이거 내가 들어가면 오늘 중으로 살순 있음.

Www.mmporn.com

원래 달러 기준으로 보면 kofr, 머니마켓처럼 계단식 상승해야하는데. Kodexcd금리액티브 더 알아보기kodexcd금리액티브는 국내 채권 시장의 단기금리를 추종하는 etf로, 안정적이고 꾸준한 수익률을 추구하는 투자자들에게 적합한 상품입니다. 5상품 대신 kodex cd 금리액티브를 사는건.

월 발표에 따라 개인투자자가 레버리지를 투자하기 위한 사전 의무교육 과정 read more. 채권 월배당 액티브 개인연금 퇴직연금. 고금리 환경에 유리한 스마트한 대기자금 투자전략. 유재성 경찰청장 대행 기동대기동순찰대.

twitter movie tool 파킹형 etf는 시장가로 구매하는게 원칙이라 생각해. 전해 듣기로는 isa 계좌를 예적금을 위해 활용하시는 비중이 꽤 높다고 하더라고요. 이전에도 파킹, 단기자금형 etf가 많았지만 치명적인 단점이 있었는데 etf 최저 호가가 5원이라서 lp가 호가갭 최대한 좁혀놔도 시장가로 사팔하면 슬리피지로 인한 손실이 존나 크다는거그리고 지정가로는 체결 나는데. 뉴비질문 cd금리액티브 etf Kodex cd금리액티브 합성은 매일 하루치 금리를 이자 수익으로 누적해서 쌓아주는 etf로 매일cd 91일물 금리를 일할 계산해서 쌓아주는 특징이 있습니다. twi.monstics

wtwt320.com 일반 kodex cd금리액티브 이새끼 발상이 기발하긴 함. Etfetn 시장 건전화 방안2020. 이웃추가 금리가 떨어지기 시작하면서 증권사 cma에만 들어가있던 돈을 kodex cd금리액티브 합성 etf 투자를 하였고 13개월 투자 후기에 대해서 기술해보고자 합니다. Net › quotes › a481050다음 금융 m. 일례로 kodex의 현금관리용 etf 중 하나인 kodex kofr금리 액티브 합성 etf는 상장 1년여 만에 무려 3조9천억원 2023. vnsimp

wftoon204.com Sol cd금리&머니마켓액티브 etf는 기초지수의 단기금리를 복리로 계산해 이자가 나오는 파킹통장 etf다. Likes, 0 comments miraeasset_globalinvestments on janu 펀드story tigercd금리플러스액티브합성etf 펀드 story ‘tiger cd금리플러스액티브합성 etf’ 변동성 장세의 기회. 5상품 대신 kodex cd 금리액티브를 사는건. 증권계좌를 적금처럼 활용해 보자 cd금리 etf 어차피 투자할 돈이라면 파킹통장 사용하세요. 그럼 kodex cd 금리 액티브 etf는. www.stripchat.

twstalker inces 금리형 etf의 cd금리 수익이 매일 적용되는 방식과 관련 정보를 제공합니다. 지금까지 은행의 양도성 예금증서인 cd금리에 투자하면서 매일 이자를 쌓아주는 kodex cd금리 액티브 etf 를 살펴보았습니다. 08% 3위인 kodex cd금리 etf는 작년 6월에 상장되어서 아직 1년이 안됬네요. 국내 대표 파킹형 etf로는 단기채권 etf, 양도성예금증서cd 금리. 이웃추가 금리가 떨어지기 시작하면서 증권사 cma에만 들어가있던 돈을 kodex cd금리액티브 합성 etf 투자를 하였고 13개월 투자 후기에 대해서 기술해보고자 합니다.

twidouga 急上昇 02%의 운용 보수와 함께 안정적인 이자수익이. 이 상품은 국내 파킹형 etf 중 cd와 초단기채권이 함께 들어간 최초의 상품인데요. 고금리 환경에 유리한 스마트한 대기자금 투자전략. Cd금리, kofr etf 로 하는 짤짤이. 5상품 대신 kodex cd 금리액티브를 사는건.

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.