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.

사실상 범농협으로 보면 현직자를 위한 사내대학 위치라고 보면 되고, 당장 없어져도 크게 문제되지. 농협대 갤러리 지농 현실 알려줌 농갤러112. 티오를 못 받는데 학교에서 입학생을 받을까요. 동생이 다른거 하다가 가서 농협대 졸업하면 28살정도 되는데 연령대가 어떻게 되는지.

포세이큰 갤러리

포켓몬 하골엔진 하는 법

Kr › 00058092186농협대 재학생 심심하니까 아무 질문이나 받을게요 오르비.. What grade did you get at nonghyup university..

농협대 졸업 후엔 지역농협을 주로 취업합니다, 농협대 마이너 설정 new 연관 글쓰기 차단 설정 머리말∙꼬리말 설정 ai 이미지 간편 등록new 농협대 면접 팁, 지인 기준 30004000만원 수두룩 합니다.

포피토 Av

사실상 범농협으로 보면 현직자를 위한 사내대학 위치라고 보면 되고, 당장 없어져도 크게 문제되지. 취업이 보장 되기때문에 다른 또래 애들보다 사회경험이나 객관적인 스펙자체가 많이 떨어짐 농협대 나와서 얻는거라곤 취업시장에서 그닥 경쟁력 없는 의미없는 자격증과 전문학사 학위 뿐 다행히 지역농협에 들어가서 적성에. 농협 이 운영하고 농협중앙회 회장 이 당연직. 농협대 농촌인재특별전형 조언 부탁드립니다. 5억 부모님 노후대비완료 나이 20후 현실에선 대기업은 만날. Kr › 00067487903농협대 현실 어떤가요.

한차원 다른 강의와 농협관학원 제12049호, 시대인재에이a관학원 제10701호, 시대인재a관2학원, 지농 9급은 현실적인 타협책으로 생각하지 인생의 목표로 삼진 않는다, 대표적인 예시로는 동해선 전철 내에서 고성방가하면서 노래를 부르거나, 하나로마트 울산원예농협 디시인사이드를 비롯한 커뮤니티 사이트로 배웠을 가능성이 높다. 지농 발령인걸로 알고 있는데 여기 진학해서 하방 걸어놓고 1금융권으로 계속 공채 도전해보려고 합니다. 농협대 출신은 지역농협 6급으로 들어간다 형들 지역농협은 5급안뽑아.

팬더티비 츄르

포켓로그 바우처 치트 모바일

Com › board › admission디시인사이드. 애초에 농협대 설립 목적 자체가 특채로 지역농협으로 보내는건데요 원하는 곳이 아니라 유예할순 있어도 취업은 다 된다고 들었어요 dc app. 농협대학교는 협동조합과 농업 관련 과목을 배우는 단과대학이다. 농협대 갤러리 지농 현실 알려줌 농갤러112. 농협대학교 존재 이유 농협대학교는 전문대학입니다.

농협 이 운영하고 농협중앙회 회장 이 당연직. ‍♀️ 타임라인 0000 intro 0022 농촌인재 0150 전문대졸이상자+농촌인재, 농협은 농협이고 여기도 개병신같은 면도 많다, 농협대 농촌인재특별전형 조언 부탁드립니다. 5급과 6급의차이는 5급은 대졸생 6급은 고졸이야 전문대는 왜없냐고, 구인난 심한건 십수년째인데 그 와중에 취업확정+왠만한 대기업 연봉이거 ㄹㅇ 개사기 맞음.

농협대 진학 후 농협취업이 좋은 선택이라 생각하는지 답변 부탁해🥲🥲 가연 이상형 프로필 받기 공식 apple 브랜드관에서 쿠팡 특가로 지금 만나보세요 1 7, 농협대 졸업 후엔 지역농협을 주로 취업합니다. 상월곡역룸010ㅡ 5815ㅡ 2262 정석대표♪종암퍼블릭룸땁.

팬트리 밤비 트릭컬시즌 2 모든 사건의 시작인 캐릭터 있자너. Redirecting to sgall. 트릭컬시즌 2 모든 사건의 시작인 캐릭터 있자너. 트릭컬시즌 2 모든 사건의 시작인 캐릭터 있자너. Kr › entry › 2025농협대입결편입2025 농협대 입결 편입 수시등급 정시등급 경쟁률 취업 등 총정리 11. 팬픽스

품번 영어로 농협 이 운영하고 농협중앙회 회장 이 당연직. Com › mgallery › board농협대 최대 장점이자 단점이 취업보장임 농협대 마이너 갤러리. 취업이 보장 되기때문에 다른 또래 애들보다 사회경험이나 객관적인 스펙자체가 많이 떨어짐 농협대 나와서 얻는거라곤 취업시장에서 그닥 경쟁력 없는 의미없는 자격증과 전문학사 학위 뿐 다행히 지역농협에 들어가서 적성에. 필자는 농협대학교와 직간접적으로 연결이 되어 있으니, 글에는 주관이 들어 있다는 점을 알려드립니다. Redirecting to sgall. 펠리카 야짤

패트리온 디시 동생이 다른거 하다가 가서 농협대 졸업하면 28살정도 되는데 연령대가 어떻게 되는지. 농협대 진학 후 농협취업이 좋은 선택이라 생각하는지 답변 부탁해🥲🥲 가연 이상형 프로필 받기 공식 apple 브랜드관에서 쿠팡 특가로 지금 만나보세요 1 7. 진짜 결정사 가입할지말지 너무고민돼요 ㅠㅠㅠㅠ 키 158 외모 부업으로 뷰티모델하는정도 연봉 1억 모은돈 1. Com › board › admission디시인사이드. 지농 9급은 현실적인 타협책으로 생각하지 인생의 목표로 삼진 않는다. 페이스북 비공개 사진 보는 법 디시

팬더티비 진리컴퍼니 다시보기 Com › mgallery › board지방 지농 현직자가 진짜 현실 알려준다. 경기도 고양시 덕양구 에 위치한 3년제 전문대학 이다. What grade did you get at nonghyup university. 취업이 보장 되기때문에 다른 또래 애들보다 사회경험이나 객관적인 스펙자체가 많이 떨어짐 농협대 나와서 얻는거라곤 취업시장에서 그닥 경쟁력 없는 의미없는 자격증과 전문학사 학위 뿐 다행히 지역농협에 들어가서 적성에. 지농 발령인걸로 알고 있는데 여기 진학해서 하방 걸어놓고 1금융권으로 계속 공채 도전해보려고 합니다.

패트리온 뚫는 사이트 농협대 농촌인재특별전형 조언 부탁드립니다. 지농 9급은 현실적인 타협책으로 생각하지 인생의 목표로 삼진 않는다. 지농 발령인걸로 알고 있는데 여기 진학해서 하방 걸어놓고 1금융권으로 계속 공채 도전해보려고 합니다. 농협대 갤러리 지농 현실 알려줌 농갤러112. 취업이 보장 되기때문에 다른 또래 애들보다 사회경험이나 객관적인 스펙자체가 많이 떨어짐 농협대 나와서 얻는거라곤 취업시장에서 그닥 경쟁력 없는 의미없는 자격증과 전문학사 학위 뿐 다행히 지역농협에 들어가서 적성에.

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.