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.

요코하마 시 쓰루미이치바 역 근처에서 차량을 렌트할 경우, 대부분의 주요 업체는 21세 이상 운전자만 렌터카 상품을 이용할 수 있도록 규정하고 있습니다. 두 번째로 저렴한 호텔은 다이와 로이넷 호텔 심바시이며, 자동차로 43분 거리에 있어요. 지금 일본 요코하마 숙소를 특가로 예약해 보세요. 요코하마의 더블룸 평균 요금은 1박당 216,233원입니다.

일곱개의 대죄 히토미

인스타 구독 19

스카이스캐너 파트너사 중 평점이 가장 높은 업체는 toyota rent a car, alamo 및 orix입니다.. 호텔스닷컴 추천 요코하마 여행 및 실시간 예약이 가능한 6,583개 호텔까지..

요코하마 nishi ward 호텔 미나토미라이 지역 중심부에 위치한 the yokohama bay hotel tokyu는 미나토미라이의 멋진 전망과 발코니, 무료 wifi를 자랑하는 널찍한 객실을보유하고 있습니다. 요코하마 nishi ward 호텔 미나토미라이 지역 중심부에 위치한 the yokohama bay hotel tokyu는 미나토미라이의 멋진 전망과 발코니, 무료 wifi를 자랑하는 널찍한 객실을보유하고 있습니다, 객실부터 편의시설, 위치, 주변 관광지까지 꼼꼼하게 비교 분석해서 여러분의 취향에 딱 맞는 호텔을 찾아드릴게요.

장원영 똥꼬

두 번째로 저렴한 호텔은 다이와 로이넷 호텔 심바시이며, 자동차로 43분 거리에 있어요, 검색 한 번으로 저렴한 호텔의 가격 정보를 정확하게 확인하세요, 요코하마의 호텔 요금은 어떻게 되나요. 요코하마 미나토 미라이 홀 호텔 요금은 변동될 수 있지만, 19,614원 부터 이용 가능합니다. 신요코하마역 주변 가성비 호텔 추천 네이버 블로그.

Kr › hotels › japan요코하마 시, 온 코호쿠 근처 저렴한 호텔 스카이스캐너, 요코하마의 호텔 가격이 가장 저렴한 달은 평균 요금이 253,200,896원인 1월입니다, 요코하마 호텔 추천 10곳 완벽 정리 요코하마 호텔 10곳 소개, 요코하마의 숙박 요금이 가장 저렴한 날은 1박당 평균 요금이 166,134원인 일요일입니다.

호텔명필수체크바로가기sotetsu fresa inn yokohama higashiguchi2020년 신축, 요코하마역 340m, 무료 wifi, 기계식 체크인아웃최저가 확인하기호텔 더 낫 요코하마레트로 크루즈 컨셉, 최상층 전망, 패밀리룸 및 바레스토랑 보유최저가 확인하기캡슐 플러스. 요코하마 내 최고의 저가 호텔 sotetsu hotels the splaisir yokohama hilton yokohama힐튼 요코하마 citadines harbour front yokohama mitsui garden hotel, Kr › place › yokohama요코하마 호텔 441개의 저렴한 요코하마 호텔 상품.

인섹 고름 요코하마 내 최고의 저가 호텔 sotetsu hotels the splaisir yokohama hilton yokohama힐튼 요코하마 citadines harbour front yokohama mitsui garden hotel. 5성급 호텔부터 가성비 숙소까지 요코하마 추천 숙소 top 10을 여기어때 특가로 만나보세요. 지금 일본 요코하마 숙소를 특가로 예약해 보세요. 이번 여행에는 14세, 11세 아이들과 동행했는데, 호텔 예약 사이트에서는 3인 객실을 추천했습니다. Com › accommodation › jp일본 요코하마 추천 호텔, 숙소 베스트 10 여기어때. 자동 정제 계수장비

장기연애 호텔 리브맥스 신 요코하마 무인 체크인 시스템으로 빠르게 숙소에 입실할 수 있어 시간이 촉박한 여행자에게 좋습니다. 에티오피아항공, parata air 등 다양한 도쿄행 항공편을 이용해보세요. 또한, 요코하마는 일본의 역사와 문화를 경험할 수 있는 다양한 박물관과 미술관이 위치해 있어, 일본의 역사와 문화를 느끼고자 하는 여행객들에게도 인기 있는 장소입니다. Com › budget › city일본 요코하마 저가 호텔 베스트 10 booking. Kr › 요코하마호텔요코하마 인기 호텔 16개. 인스타 라이브로 젖가슴 보여주는 아프리카 존예 비제이

자매사육 캠핑장에서 생긴일 합리적인 가격은 물론 교통, 청결, 조식까지 고려한 완벽한 숙소들을 소개합니다. 요코하마 지역 숙소의 평균 요금은 240,692원박 입니다. 숙소 요금이 더 저렴하다면 이 근처에 머무는 것도 좋은 선택이 될 수 있어요. 요코하마 nishi ward 호텔 미나토미라이 지역 중심부에 위치한 the yokohama bay hotel tokyu는 미나토미라이의 멋진 전망과 발코니, 무료 wifi를 자랑하는 널찍한 객실을보유하고 있습니다. Kr › hotels › japan요코하마 시, hachiman shrine 근처 저렴한 호텔 스카이스캐너. 쟈니 여친

자위와 노화 Kr › hotels › japan요코하마 시, mutsukawa central park 근처 저렴한 호텔 스카이스캐. 합리적인 가격은 물론 교통, 청결, 조식까지 고려한 완벽한 숙소들을 소개합니다. Kr › place › yokohama요코하마 호텔 441개의 저렴한 요코하마 호텔 상품. 가성비 좋은 호텔 top 5를 소개합니다. 이번 여행에는 14세, 11세 아이들과 동행했는데, 호텔 예약 사이트에서는 3인 객실을 추천했습니다.

일본 트위터 섹스 신요코하마, 신요코하마 역주면의 호텔을 원하시는 조건으로 가격비교. 날짜를 선택하고 세금과 수수료를 포함한 숙박 요금 합계를 검색하세요. 요코하마 nishi ward 호텔 미나토미라이 지역 중심부에 위치한 the yokohama bay hotel tokyu는 미나토미라이의 멋진 전망과 발코니, 무료 wifi를 자랑하는 널찍한 객실을보유하고 있습니다. 요코하마 내 최고의 저가 호텔 sotetsu hotels the splaisir yokohama hilton yokohama힐튼 요코하마 citadines harbour front yokohama mitsui garden hotel. 호텔스컴바인에서 사쿠라기초 역의 호텔 상품을 한눈에 비교하세요.

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.