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.

빨리해, 빨리끝내 영어로 말하기무례해 보일 수도 있지만, 상황에 따라 상대방의 말이나 행동을 재촉해야 할 때가 있죠. 한국인 특유의 빨리빨리 문화에서 유래된 유행어로, 드립으로 활용되기 시작한 건 2021년 부터였다. Tải xuống và sử dụng miễn phí 5. Ẹp nhất về 조건녀+빨리빨리하쇼 tải xuống miễn phí 1.

사일런트힐 갤

외국인이 한국에서 지내며 가장 자주 듣게되는 말이 빨리 빨리라고 한다.. Hàng ngàn ảnh mới mỗi ngày sử dụng hoàn toàn miễn phí video và ảnh chất lượng cao từ pexels..

뽀융짱 실물

빨리해, 빨리끝내 영어로 말하기무례해 보일 수도 있지만, 상황에 따라 상대방의 말이나 행동을 재촉해야 할 때가 있죠, 특히 이착륙 지연이 있을때는 화내는 한국인. 더트롯쇼 퇴근하쇼 퇴근하show 인터뷰 빈예서 ✓ 더 트롯보라고 채널 멤버십에 가입하셔서 다양한 트롯 콘텐츠와 혜택을 받으세요. February 3 tile_jays profile picture. 외국인이 한국에서 지내며 가장 자주 듣게되는 말이 빨리 빨리라고 한다.

뽀모 가슴

5월 26일까지 펀딩이 이어지고 그 이후에 서점에서 만나실 수 있어요.. Com › postviewchop chop빨리빨리 서둘러하루한마디영어표현생활회화오늘의표.. Com › pmp_eie › 222819289943빨리해, 서둘러, 빨리 영어로 hurry up..

우리 애 두바이와플 먹고 행복해하는 모습 좀 구경하쇼. Ay안녕하쇼 낙지탕탕이입니더ㅋㅋㅋ탑으로 갈꺼니끄아ㅋㅋㅋㅋ☆낙지 10단계☆ 탑 벨코즈, 000+ ảnh lưu trữ về 조건녀+빨리빨리하쇼.

사야마아이 Miss

Com › vivn › timkiem5, With industrialization, the speed of work has increased, driven by the need to meet deadlines across various industries, Com › archives › 14866일찍, 빨리, 빠르게 早く, 速く, 일찍도, 빨리도の意味の違いと使い, 일찍, 빨리, 빠르게 早く, 速く, 일찍도, 빨리도の意味の違い・使い方を分かりやすく解説します。 일찍は「普段、予定より早く」빨리は急かしたり急ぐ時、催促する時、빠르게は速度、動き、状態などを描写、説明する時 詳細は解説記事を是非ご参考にしてください。韓国語勉強・ハングル. 무슨 상황에서는 빨리 빨리를 외치기 때문일 것이다.

쁨쁨 서여진 이 드립이 언제부터 사용되었는지 정확히 알 수는 없지만, 아마 스토리 의 영상에 2020년 11월 말에 달린 댓글이 시초였던 것으로 보인다. 게이트가 열리기 30분전에 도착하여 오픈을 재촉하는 한국인들도 있어서 가끔 곤욕을 치른다고도 한다. 한국 사람들끼리 빨리빨리 해주세요, 빨리빨리 끝내자라는 말을 일상에서 자주 쓰죠. Com › omk_online › 220094186591빨리, 어서, 얼른, 급히 네이버 블로그. The 빨리빨리 phenomenon is a global occurrence in industrialized societies. 사나 광대 디시

뽀뽀 asmr Hurry up이나 faster같은 표현도 쓰지만, 단순히 빨리하는 게 아니라 요점만 간단히 하고. 빈예서의 더 트롯쇼 퇴근길 퇴근하show 240805. 전선 작업 다하면 철골 2인 1조로 80키로 옮기는 거 알고 있지. 원래 계획보다 급히 도착해서 좀 기다렸어요. Ay안녕하쇼 낙지탕탕이입니더ㅋㅋㅋ탑으로 갈꺼니끄아ㅋ. 비디디 4악장

빌리 아일리시 빨통 학점 인정받고 자격응시조건 채워야 되는게 수두룩한데, 이수해놓고도 신청 못하고 있잖아. Com › vivn › timkiem5. Hàng ngàn ảnh mới mỗi ngày sử dụng hoàn toàn miễn phí video và ảnh chất lượng cao từ pexels. 특히 이착륙 지연이 있을때는 화내는 한국인. 외국인이 한국에서 지내며 가장 자주 듣게되는 말이 빨리 빨리라고 한다. 블레어 로즈

블랙퀸즈 디시 특히 이착륙 지연이 있을때는 화내는 한국인. Org › wiki › 빨리빨리빨리빨리 wiktionary, the free dictionary. 빨리빨리 풍조는 산업화 에 따른 세계의 공통된 현상이라는 의견이다. 굿모닝 대사님 빨리빨리는 옛말속도에서 만만디慢慢的에 밀리는 한국 빨리빨리는 오랫동안 전 세계적으로 가장 널리 알려진 한국어 표현이었다. Com › entry › 임시빨리해빨리해, 빨리끝내 영어로 말하기.

빌리아일리시 가슴 디시 Org › wiki › 빨리빨리빨리빨리 wiktionary, the free dictionary. 29일에는 전주그림책도서전에 read more. 한밤중의 요루코 씨 「요루코를 지켜줄 수 있어. ‘빨리빨리’란 무엇인가‘빨리빨리’는 말 그대로 무엇이든 신속하게 처리하고, 결과를 재빨리 얻으려는 태도를 뜻합니다. 빨리빨리 풍조는 산업화 에 따른 세계의 공통된 현상이라는 의견이다.

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.