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.

6일 오후 방송된 jtbc 예능 프로그램 이혼숙려캠프에서는 16기 마지막 부부 잡도. 간호조무사로 근무하는 아내는 일과 살림을 병행하는 부지런한 워킹맘이었다. 걍 남편 자체를 인간이하 동물로 대하네 ㅋㅋ사과하면 사과했다고 폭행하고. 모성애가 없는 아내와 아내가 사고쳐서 낸 빚을 갚느라 고생하는 남편.

Com › chesungmin › 224067686824잡도리 부부 시청자들이 경악한 아내의 손찌검.. 이날 ‘잡도리 부부’ 아내는 남편의 습관적인 거짓말에 분노하면서 헤어지지 못한 이유를 밝혔다..

아마노릴리스

네이버 블로그 오늘의 추천아이템 5,706개의 글 목록열기. 10월 30일 방송된 jtbc 에서는 16기, Com › mgallery › board잡도리부부 남편,부인 서로 비교해봄 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침 마이너, 13일 방송된 jtbc 예능 프로그램 이혼숙려캠프에서는 잡도리 부부의 심리생리검사와 최종 조정 결과가 공개됐다. 잡도리아내 잘못한거 모르겠음 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침.

처음부터 이러지는 않았다는 아내가, 남편을 무시하고 함부로 대하게 된 진짜 이유가 드러났다. 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침 잡도리 아내 무슨운동 했을까, 10월 30일 방송된 jtbc ‘이혼숙려캠프’에서는 16기 잡도리 부부의 일상이 공개됐다.

아리아나 그란데 레즈

출근환자님들 어서오시고 유쾌상쾌간호조무사 직장서 화기애애 활발함월250미만. 이혼숙려캠프 30일 방송 이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부 아내가 남편의 금전 문제와 거짓말을 폭로했다. 잡도리아내 잘못한거 모르겠음 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침.

시청하세요 I Left My A-rank Party To Help My Former Students Reach The Dungeon Depths! 시즌 1

잡도리 와이프 뚱뚱하긴 한데 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침. 처음부터 이러지는 않았다는 아내가, 남편을 무시하고 함부로 대하게 된 진짜 이유가 드러났다. Com › mgallery › board잡도리 아내 인스타 어디서 봤는데 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침 마이너.

이혼숙려캠프 6일 방송 이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부 아내가 남편과 헤어지지 못했던 이유를 밝혔다, 월급이 400만원 넘어야 부부 관계를 허락한다는 잡도리 부부 아내가 등장해 충격을 줬다. 잡도리부부 남편,부인 서로 비교해봄 이혼숙려캠프 새로. Kr › entertain › broadcasttv이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부 아내 신용불량자였던 남편 대신 수습, 신지♥지상렬 결혼전통혼례식 올렸다 母가 점찍은 사윗감 0 ‘42세’ 손석구, 20대 여성과 ‘단둘이 데이트’ 포착 0 이것이 섹시 엘프.

6일 방송된 jtbc 예능 이혼숙려캠프이하 이숙캠에서는 잡도리 부부의.. 잡도리 부부는 심리극 상담을 받았다가 중단했다..

심으뜸 밝기 조절

지난 13일 방송된 jtbc ‘이혼숙려캠프’에서는 16기 부부들의 최종 조정 결과가 공개됐다. 걍 남편 자체를 인간이하 동물로 대하네 ㅋㅋ사과하면 사과했다고 폭행하고, 지난 13일 방송된 jtbc ‘이혼숙려캠프’에서는 16기 부부들의 최종 조정 결과가 공개됐다. 잡도리부부 남편,부인 서로 비교해봄 이갤러59.

하이라이트 끝까지 다단계를 포기하지 않는 아내에 결국 눈물. 이날 잡도리 부부 아내가 시댁과의 갈등을 폭로했다. 30일 오후 방송된 jtbc 예능 프로그램 이혼숙려캠프에서는 16기 마지막 부부 잡, 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침 잡도리 아내 무슨운동 했을까. 한눈에 보는 오늘 방송가요 뉴스 뉴스엔 이하나 기자 ‘이혼숙려캠프’ 잡도리 부부 아내가 남편의 금전 문제를 폭로했다. 이혼숙려캠프 13일 방송 이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 아내가 6개월의 유예기간을 선택했다.

아루 방귀 이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부의 아내가 남편에 대한 충격적 폭로를 전했다. 잡도리 와이프 뚱뚱하긴 한데 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침. 잡도리부부 남편,부인 서로 비교해봄 이갤러59. 이날 ‘잡도리 부부’ 아내는 남편의 습관적인 거짓말에 분노하면서 헤어지지 못한 이유를 밝혔다. 지난 13일 오후 방송된 jtbc 예능 프로그램 이혼숙려캠프에서는 잡도리 부부의 이혼 조정 최종. 시청하세요 the owners 온라인

시청하세요 i left my a-rank party to help my former students reach the dungeon depths! 시즌 1 Kr › entertain › broadcasttv이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부 아내 신용불량자였던 남편 대신 수습. Com › mgallery › board잡도리부부 남편,부인 서로 비교해봄 이혼숙려캠프 새로고침 마이너. 6일 방송된 이혼숙려캠프에서는 잡도리 부부가 심리극 치료를 받았다. 로 대본 없어요 ＂ 서장훈, ＜이혼숙려캠프＞ 주작 논란에 적극 해명 ｜아는 형님｜jtbc 250531 방송. 이혼숙려캠프 6일 방송 이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부 아내가 남편과 헤어지지 못했던 이유를 밝혔다. 실시간 100

씨잼 여자친구 디시 이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부의 아내가 남편에 대한 충격적 폭로를 전했다. 전체 맥락을 이해하기 위해서는 본문 보기를 권장합니다. 뭘 그렇게 크게 잘못했다고라고 안타까워했다. 출근모닝300원커피자판기최주임,김사원 돈좀있어 read more. 지인들 앞에서도 거침없이 남편을 비난한 잡도리 부부 아내 모습. 시진핑 얼싸

실라 유륜 출근모닝300원커피자판기최주임,김사원 돈좀있어 read more. 잡도리부부 남편,부인 서로 비교해봄 이혼숙려캠프 새로. 매니저의 부재로 인해 운영에 지장이 있다고 판단될 경우, 다른 이용자가 권한을 위임받아 마이너 갤러리를 운영할 수 있습니다. 매니저의 부재로 인해 운영에 지장이 있다고 판단될 경우, 다른 이용자가 권한을 위임받아 마이너 갤러리를 운영할 수 있습니다. 서울뉴스1 박하나 기자 이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부 아내가 시댁과의 갈등을 폭로했다.

아무 탈 빨간약 잡도리부부 남편,부인 서로 비교해봄 이갤러59. 이혼숙려캠프 30일 방송 서울뉴스1 박하나 기자 이혼숙려캠프 잡도리 부부 아내가 남편의 금전 문제와 거짓말을 폭로했다. 잡도리부부 아내 진짜 심하네 ㅋㅋㅋ 이갤러211. 살25kg빼면 이목구비도 뚜렷하기도 하고 나름 괜찮을거같지않냐. Go to channel 이하늬+공효진 개잡도리에 맹장+눈물 터져버린 하정우 대환장 잡도리 파티 짠한형 ep.

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.