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.

일반 미국주식 갤러리 etf 추천리스트 ver. 미국 etf 순위 디시는 다양한 이유로 투자자들에게 주목받고 있습니다. Com › entry › 미국etf순위미국 etf 순위 디시, 투자자들이 주목하는 이유. 미국 월배당 etfetf인데 배당을 매달 준다고.

브롤스타즈 콜레트 일러스트

초기에는 s&p 500 등 특정 지수를 그대로 추종하는 패시브.. 국내상장 해외etf의 실제 수수료, 시가총액, 수익률, 괴리율을 한눈에 비교해보세요.. 초기에는 s&p 500 등 특정 지수를 그대로 추종하는 패시브..

사이타마 패션헬스

시드는 얼마 안되지만, 나름 큰 하락장이었던 코로나금리인상 시기를 견뎌낸 겸,레버리지 etf 투자가 간절한 나와 같은 흙수저 투자자에게 도움이 될까 싶어서내가 했던 실수와 몇가지 생각해볼만한 점들을 글로 공유해봄1, 미국 시장 뿐만 아니라 미국을 제외한 모든 국가의 증시를 따라가기 때문에. 이곳은 투자자들이 서로의 경험과 지식을 공유하고, 시장의 현재 트렌드에 대한 인사이트를 제공받는 소중한 공간입니다. Etf trader 미니 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털 디시인사이드.

Rsp는 동일비중을 줘도 슨피 수익률에 저조하고 운용보수는 qqq급으로 내라고 해서요. 많은 이들이 미국 시장에 진출하고 싶어 하는 이유는 다양하지만, 가장 큰 매력은 미국 경제의 안정성과 성장 잠재력에 있습니다, Etf trader 미니 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털 디시인사이드.

정말 다양한 etf가 많지 않습니까. Etf 마이너 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털 디시인사이드. Etf 디시란 개인 투자자들이 etf상장지수펀드에 대한 다양한 정보를 공유하고, 의견을 나누는 커뮤니티를 의미합니다.

브롤 파이퍼 ㅗㅜㅑ

최근에 원화 떡락관련해서 주식이랑 etf에 관심이 많이생겨 시작해보려고함, Etf완전정복 미니 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털 디시인사이드, 리밸런싱 연 4회인데 운용 존나 잘함. 그저 주가가 오르면 좋고, 떨어지면 손해라는 단순한 개념만 있었죠. 이러한 커뮤니티는 투자자들이 서로의 경험을 통해 배우고, 시장 동향이나 etf에 대한 분석을 공유하는데 매우 유용합니다. 키방거지들 잡는재미 쏠쏠 아크 레이더스 마이너 갤러리.

전 세계 여러 국가, 여러 섹터의 호기심을 갖고 지식을 쌓으며 etfetn을 통해 자산을 불려가는 것을 목적으로 합니다. 미국 주식 갤러리에서 etf 추천 리스트를 확인하고 다양한 투자 정보를 얻을 수 있습니다, ㅎㅇ 주딱이 글쓰기전에 후딱 간단하게 써봄먼저 etfexchangetraded fund, 상장지수펀드란 주식시장에서 거래되는 투자신탁 상품임, 저는 처음엔 per, pbr 이런 용어보다 ‘배당 나온다니까 좋다’는 말만 듣고, 바로 월배당 etf부터 샀어요. 추천 상품을 살펴보면서 무엇보다 중요한 것은 각 etf의 성격과 투자 전략을 이해하는 것입니다, 미국etf, 배당주 마이너 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털.

빌리 아일리 시 레전드 디시 Search results for grid etf 디시 on polymarket prediction markets. 미국 주식 갤러리에서 etf 추천 리스트를 확인하고 다양한 투자 정보를 얻을 수 있습니다. Tlt 과거 차트를 볼때, 추천은 드릴 수 없을꺼 같았습니다. 같은 섹터인 반도체이지만 2배 추종인 usd가 최고의 etf라고 볼 수 있는데 반해 3배 추종인 soxl은 안 하느니만 못한 etf라고도 볼 수 있음. ㅎㅇ 주딱이 글쓰기전에 후딱 간단하게 써봄먼저 etfexchangetraded fund, 상장지수펀드란 주식시장에서 거래되는 투자신탁 상품임. 빌리 가슴

사이타마 데리헤루 S&p 500 미니 갤러리는 디시인사이드의 해외주식 지수추종 etf를 다루는 갤러리이다. Etf는 주식처럼 거래되면서도 다수의 주식으로 포트폴리오를 구성해 위험을 분산시키는 특징을 가지고 있습니다. 뉴욕 공화당 마이너 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털 디시인사이드. 1배로 만족하기에는 시드가 적고 그렇다고 3배로 하자니 그 변동성을 감당할 멘탈이 안 되기 때문입니다. 사람들이 잘 모르는 개쩌는 etf 하나 소개해준다. 빌리 아일리시 유출 야동

사키 사노바시 실제로 투자하면서 느낀 건 정보의 깊이가 수익률을 결정짓는다는 점이에요. 국내상장 해외etf 한눈에 비교하는 사이트 만듬 미국 주식. 미국 시장 뿐만 아니라 미국을 제외한 모든 국가의 증시를 따라가기 때문에. 국내상장 해외etf 한눈에 비교하는 사이트 만듬 미국 주식. 국내 대표 etf 5개 종목을 소개 etf etn 마이너 갤러리. 비비 사과 티비

빌리 아일리 시 레전드 디시 미국 etf와 배당주 투자에 특화된 정보 교류 갤러리. Etf입문 포폴 자문 etf 마이너 갤러리. 과정 개요 etfetn 시장 건전화 방안 2020. Etf입문 포폴 자문 etf 마이너 갤러리. 매달 들어온다는 게 너무 매력적이었거든요.

빈유 섹트 Com › entry › 미국etf순위미국 etf 순위 디시, 투자자들이 주목하는 이유. 이 글에서는 etf 수익률 순위를 국내 기준으로 정리하고, 주요 특징과 투자 팁을 공유한다. S&p 500 미니 갤러리는 디시인사이드의 해외주식 지수추종 etf를 다루는 갤러리이다. 이 글에서는 etf 수익률 순위를 국내 기준으로 정리하고, 주요 특징과 투자 팁을 공유한다. Etf는 주식처럼 거래되면서도 다수의 주식으로 포트폴리오를 구성해 위험을 분산시키는 특징을 가지고 있습니다.

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.