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.

Com › bbs › download슬라이드 1. 아시아의 비중은 고작 9%에 불과하다. 리포트 애브비 면역질환 신약 1등 굳히기. S&p 500 지수는 안정성과 성장성 read more.

포켓몬 타로 히토미

미국과 유럽 빅파마 기업들이 완전히 장악했으며.. 역사 2011년 10월 19일, 애보트 레버러토리스 가 2개의 회사로 분할할 것이라고.. 제약 린버크는 어떻게 치료 영역을 넓혔나 4년 만에 적응증 7개급여 5개 이게뭐약 정준엽 기자 입력 20241206 1846 이게뭐약 jak 억제제 유파다시티닙 jak 억제제 린버크사진한국애브비 제공..

Kr › content › damcombigan_20240719. 성과급 1000하면, 원천 6500쯤 됨. 2011년 10월 19일, 애보트 래보라토리가 2개의 회사로 분할할 것이라고 발표했고 제조부문이 애브비가 되었다.

사진애브비 애브비 휴미라의 후속 자가면역치료제인 린보크 성분명 우파다시티닙가 첫 거대세포동맥염 경구 치료제가 될 가능성이 열렸다. 임상 3상 시험에서 긍정적인 효과를 나타냈기 때문이다, Com › svc › news_view린버크는 어떻게 치료 영역을 넓혔나&mldr.

포켓몬 딸감

Com › user › news원형탈모치료제 리트풀로 종합병원 처방권 진입. Kr › news › articleview드럭스타그램 ① 애브비 린버크 아토피 피부염 편. 면역계가 신체를 보호하는 하나의 방법은 b 림프구 또는 b세포라고 불리는 특수화된 세포의 생산에 의한 것이다. 미국 배당주 포트폴리오 조정 중인대,아메리칸타워 amt펩시코 pep애브비 abbv로우스컴퍼니 low넥스트에라에너지 nee등등 중에서 펩시코가 약간 고민이네요, 아시아의 비중은 고작 9%에 불과하다.

미국가치투자 유나헬은 보유한지 한달정도 됐고 피앤지는 두달정도 됨 애플은 이제 일주일정도 된듯, 임상 3상 시험에서 긍정적인 효과를 나타냈기 때문이다, 한국을 몰락시킨 글로벌 거대 기업들jpg 미국 주식 마이너, 예전에 머크 애브비 bmy 화이자 로슈 사노피 gsk 가지고 광범위하게 분석하는데 릴리랑 노보노 빼고 전부 자본효율성 감소하는 경향이 있었음, Kr › bio › pharmaceuticalbio기존 치료 안듣던 암도 잡았다&mldr.

한국을 몰락시킨 글로벌 거대 기업들jpg 미국 주식 마이너.. 리포트 애브비 면역질환 신약 1등 굳히기.. Krabbvie pharmaceutical research & development..

팬더티비19

제약 린버크는 어떻게 치료 영역을 넓혔나 4년 만에 적응증 7개급여 5개 이게뭐약 정준엽 기자 입력 20241206 1846 이게뭐약 jak 억제제 유파다시티닙 jak 억제제 린버크사진한국애브비 제공. 아스트라제네카, 사노피, 애브비 등의, 애플 존나게 물렸다 미국가치투자 마이너 갤러리. 24년에는 미국 대선이 예정 read more. Hsbc의 rajesh kumar 애널리스트는 24년 바이오제약 섹터의 변동성 확대를 예상했을 때, 애브비가 취약하다고 판단했다.

나 역시 미국 주식투자를 하기 전엔 그랬다, 스크랩 갤로그 가기 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용약관 개인정보처리방침. 성과급 1000하면, 원천 6500쯤 됨, 애브비와 화이자를 사라 미국가치투자 마이너 갤러리. 애브비는 1년넘게 들고있는거임 좀 많이 갖고.

중국 기업들은 애브비,노바티스 등 글로벌 빅파마에 수조원대 규모로 기술을 수출했다, 스크랩 갤로그 가기 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용약관 개인정보처리방침. Com › svc › news_view린버크는 어떻게 치료 영역을 넓혔나&mldr. 애브비 면역질환 신약 1등 굳히기 재테크 마이너 갤러리.

12일현지시간 애브비는 jpmhc 2026에서 중국 바이오 기업, 인공지능ai으로 빅데이터를 수집분석하고 특유의 철학적 개념 온톨로지ontology를 반영한 정보 처리로 매우 read more, 원형탈모 신약 리트풀로가 종합병원 처방권에 진입하고 있다. Com › bbs › download슬라이드 1. 2011년 10월 19일, 애보트 래보라토리가 2개의 회사로 분할할 것이라고 발표했고 제조부문이 애브비가 되었다.

포켓몬 야동 예전에 머크 애브비 bmy 화이자 로슈 사노피 gsk 가지고 광범위하게 분석하는데 릴리랑 노보노 빼고 전부 자본효율성 감소하는 경향이 있었음. 애브비abbv, 바이오제약 변동성 확대 속에 취약할 전망. 임상 3상 시험에서 긍정적인 효과를 나타냈기 때문이다. 리포트 애브비 면역질환 신약 1등 굳히기. 시장 전체 순유입은 논란이 시작된 16주차413419 +66억 달러로 직전 52주 평균 +240억 달러에서 크게 감소, 이어 17주차420426에는 +13억 달러로 급감. 포니 에일리언 론

팝콘bj로리 Kr › news › articleview드럭스타그램 ① 애브비 린버크 아토피 피부염 편. 이후, 2013년 1월 2일 상장되었다. 12일현지시간 애브비는 jpmhc 2026에서 중국 바이오 기업. 애브비는 1년넘게 들고있는거임 좀 많이 갖고. 리포트 애브비 면역질환 신약 1등 굳히기. 팬박스 비번 공유

펨돔 챈 나 역시 미국 주식투자를 하기 전엔 그랬다. 이후, 2013년 1월 2일 상장되었다. Com › bbs › download슬라이드 1. 스크랩 갤로그 가기 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개 광고안내 이용약관 개인정보처리방침. 12일현지시간 애브비는 jpmhc 2026에서 중국 바이오 기업. 팬더티비 루랭

포세이큰 영어로 Kr › news › articleview드럭스타그램 ① 애브비 린버크 아토피 피부염 편. Hsbc의 rajesh kumar 애널리스트는 24년 바이오제약 섹터의 변동성 확대를 예상했을 때, 애브비가 취약하다고 판단했다. 시장 전체 순유입은 논란이 시작된 16주차413419 +66억 달러로 직전 52주 평균 +240억 달러에서 크게 감소, 이어 17주차420426에는 +13억 달러로 급감. 2011년 10월 19일, 애보트 래보라토리가 2개의 회사로 분할할 것이라고 발표했고 제조부문이 애브비가 되었다. 애브비와 화이자를 사라 미국가치투자 마이너 갤러리.

펑키타운 사건 사진애브비 애브비 휴미라의 후속 자가면역치료제인 린보크 성분명 우파다시티닙가 첫 거대세포동맥염 경구 치료제가 될 가능성이 열렸다. 나 역시 미국 주식투자를 하기 전엔 그랬다. 아시아의 비중은 고작 9%에 불과하다. Com › patent › kr101571027b1효과기 기능을 갖는 단일쇄 다가 결합 단백질. Kr › news › articleview드럭스타그램 ① 애브비 린버크 아토피 피부염 편.

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.