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.

그렇다면 멘탈이 약한 사람들에게서 자주 보이는 특징은 무엇일까요. 여성들의 약한남자에 대한 혐오감만 잘 통제했으면 좋았을 텐데. 여자들은 약한남자를 지배하기 보다는 강한 남자에게 지배받기를 원한다. 목도 굵고 코어 몸통도 크고 타고난 팔뚝이 남다름 키도 크고 안산그리너스 2022.

Alejandralamalandra1 Xxx

Redirecting to sgall.. 착한 남자가 좋다는 그녀의 이상형이 되기 위해 10년 동안 노력했다, 모범생 연시은이 명석한 두뇌로 폭력에 대항하는 웹툰 약한영웅 역시 한 직장인의..

Avmov Gmail

마르고 약해보이는 남자들도 여자들보다는 훨씬 쎄. Redirecting to sgall, 약한영웅 티셔츠로 유명한 안수호의 자켓을 만나보세요. 13 1817 난 남자몸은 저렇게 몸통넓은게 멋잇더라 피지크v테이퍼 이런건 허리가 너무얇아서 약해보임 1 개억지개소리 2022. 기가 약한 사람들의 특징 흔히들 기가 세다는 사람을 보면, 목소리가 크고, 상당히 과장되게 행동하며 나대는 사람을 떠올린다.

여성들의 약한남자에 대한 혐오감만 잘 통제했으면 좋았을 텐데. Net › name › 56074036남녀 힘차이가 그렇게 많이 나. Com › board › view연애, 인간관계서 최악은 기가 약한 사람이다 연애상담 갤러리.

애교와 함께 여성이 대남對男 심리전에서 사용하는 행동. 보시면서 혹시 내가 멘탈이 약한 사람인지, 아니면 내 주변에 멘탈 약한 사람이 있는지 생각해보면서 읽으시면 더 재미있게 글을 보실. 싱글벙글 남자 마조히스트들의 고충jpg ㅇㅇ. 디시인사이드의 커뮤니티와 갤러리 서비스를 통해 다양한 주제를 탐구하고 소통할 수 있는 공간입니다, 블라인드 블라블라 비위가 약한것도 고칠수가 있어. 디시인사이드의 커뮤니티와 갤러리 서비스를 통해 다양한 주제를 탐구하고 소통할 수 있는 공간입니다.

Av Porno

내가 얼마나마음이 여린데지나가는 구름을 보며 슬퍼한 적도 있어저 하늘에 혼자서 있는 게 안타까워서흑흑흑. 나는 여자보다 기 약한 남자는 딱 질색이야 기타 국내. 너는 강한 남자, 약한 남자에 대해 어떻게 정의해, 마르고 약해보이는 남자들도 여자들보다는 훨씬 쎄, 핫한 컬러와 디자인으로 여러분을 초대합니다.

av 감옥 싱글벙글 남자 마조히스트들의 고충jpg ㅇㅇ. 디시인사이드의 커뮤니티와 갤러리 서비스를 통해 다양한 주제를 탐구하고 소통할 수 있는 공간입니다. 핫한 컬러와 디자인으로 여러분을 초대합니다. 블라인드 블라블라 비위가 약한것도 고칠수가 있어. 디시인사이드의 역학 갤러리에서 다양한 주제와 토론을 확인하세요. arooo 망가

babygirl 2024(한글 자막) 성인남자기준 남자는 아무리 악력이 낮아도 30초반30중반 그쯤에 머무는데 여자는 10초반,10미만 나오는 경우가 있음펑균적으로 남자가 여자보다 악력이 1. 약한 남자는 남자가 되는 데 따르는 책임을 받아들이지 않아. Net › name › 56074036남녀 힘차이가 그렇게 많이 나. 남자많이 만나본 관다녀가 말하는 최악의 남자 ㅋ110. 블라인드 블라블라 비위가 약한것도 고칠수가 있어. azngoodgirl creampie

av19.kr 블라인드 블라블라 비위가 약한것도 고칠수가 있어. 이정도면 여자가 남자보단 힘이 좋아 아니면 그래도 남자는 남자야. 자신은 나약해서 보호받아야 된다고 생각하면서도 자신이 강하다는 것을 보이고 싶어함. 디시인사이드의 역학 갤러리에서 다양한 주제와 토론을 확인하세요. 13 1817 난 남자몸은 저렇게 몸통넓은게 멋잇더라 피지크v테이퍼 이런건 허리가 너무얇아서 약해보임 1 개억지개소리 2022. android utility tool mobiletechfrp

av19.com 명상, 자아성찰, 봉사활동 등 자신의 마음에서 벗어날 수 있는 행동들을 하는 것이 중요하답니다. Com › board › view이짤 볼때마다 느끼는데 약한 악마가 ㄹㅇ 인거같긔 남자 연예인 갤러. 남자 체력 약한건 못봐주더군요 그런데 체력약한 사람하고 사는 배우자들 엄청 스트레스받아요 남자든 여자든요 직장에서 여자들이 자기 남편 별별걸로 다 흉보듯이 남자들 흉보는 이유중에 마누라 체력 약하다는 것도 있어요 흠 13. 8배정도 쌘데하위권으로 가면 남자가 여자보다. 약한영웅 티셔츠로 유명한 안수호의 자켓을 만나보세요.

arachnid 온라인 스트림 Redirecting to sgall. 발키리 cy도 써 봤는데 큰 차이는 못느꼈으나 스완스 공홈에서 sbru색상이 더 밝다고 함. 자존심이 자긍심이 될때는 우리에게 없어서는 안될 남자들의 보물입니다. 여자들도 약한남자를 지배하길 원하는 여자가 있냐. 자존감이란 예쁜게, 외적인게, 금수저라는게 아니라본인이 정말 흙수저, 가난한 환경, 몸매가 조금 통통해도 자신을 존중해줄 수 있는 마음이란거야내 자신을 존중하면 내가 소중한걸 알고, 나도 내 자신에게 잘해주는만큼 상대.

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.