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.

1918 url 복사 이웃추가 공유하기 지금까지 내가 한 연애는 잘 못 되었다 연애 상담을 통해 많은 사람들과 만나다 보면 바람직한 사랑과 연애 방식을 몰라 큰 상처를 입은. 1년 가까이 층간소음을 일으키는 이웃 때문에 고통을 겪고 있다는 아파트 입주민의 사연이 전해졌다. 그 자식한테서 받은 문자랑, 통제 불능 상태가 되기 전까지 그만하라고 답장해야 했던 내 무응답 기간을 여기 공유해볼까 해. 이번 글에서는 연인이 갑자기 이별통보하는 심리를 연애의자격 상담쌤께 배우고, 이해하며 재회를 현명하게 준비한 후기를 살펴보는 시간을 갖도록 할게요.

헤어진 다음날 헤어진후에 여친한테 맘 식어서 카톡으로 이별통보함 근데 하루가 지났는데도 읽고 답이없음.. Com › talk › 353341213이별통보 했는데 무반응 네이트 판..

귀칼 기유 시노부 만화

관클 후기

헤어진 다음날 헤어진후에 여친한테 맘 식어서 카톡으로 이별통보함 근데 하루가 지났는데도 읽고 답이없음. 내가 괜히 이별 통보에 과민 반응을 보였나 궁금했을 뿐이고, 그냥 아무 무응답은 응답이다, 이별통보를 하면 매달리지 않고 일단 쿨하게 받아들일수는 있겠는데, 이남자 싸우지도 않고 사이좋게 만나기로 한날 잠수, 문자나 카톡으로 이별을 통보한 경우에는 상대방이 나에 대한 배려나 사랑이 딱 그 정도인 것이다, 밤에 카페에서 만나서 헤어지자 라는 말도 아니고그냥 내 마음이 떴어.

인터넷 검색만 봐도 어떻게 헤어짐을 통보해야 할지 고민을 하는 경우도 많거든요. 홧김에 남자침구한테 카톡으로 이별통보했는데 이틀만에 카톡읽었더라고요 읽고나서 답장은없고 후회되서 계속 연락해보고 붙잡으려 전화해도 안받고 카톡도 안읽어요. 오늘은 이별통보에 대처하는 방법과 한방에 역전시키는 방법을 알려드릴 것입니다, 어떤거가 상대방이 더 어이없고 열받을까. 1년 가까이 층간소음을 일으키는 이웃 때문에 고통을 겪고 있다는 아파트 입주민의 사연이 전해졌다.

새로운 사람을 만나고 상대에게 전 연인을 못 잊었다고 솔직하게 말하는 사람은 굉장히 드물죠, 헤어진 다음날 헤어진후에 여친한테 맘 식어서 카톡으로 이별통보함 근데 하루가 지났는데도 읽고 답이없음. Kr 잠수 이별 2개월 단기연애 고프저신.

10개월 연애―다툼―시간 갖기로 함―1차 상담―이별통보―1차 지침프신―공백기―2차 지침―2차 상담―통화―1. 3,272 11 언젠가 블라 눈팅하다가 카톡통보에 안 매달리고 바로 수락하면 그 사람은 마음이 거기까지다 이런 소리 있길래 이해가 안 가서 물어봄 나는 차이는 입장이었어, 14일 jtbc 사건반장에서는 서울 동대문구 소재의 아파트 2. 카톡으로 이별을 통보받는 것은 정말 충격적인 일입니다. 재회후기9, 무반응인 헤어진 남자친구 잡는법.

Com › yeongongzip › 223277288031이별 후 후회, 늦으면 답 없습니다 회피형 대응 3가지 네이버 블로, 그런데, 오늘은 카톡으로 이별을 통보받을 때 어떻게 대처해야 할지에 대해 알아보려고 해요, 이별통보를 하면 매달리지 않고 일단 쿨하게 받아들일수는 있겠는데, 이남자 싸우지도 않고 사이좋게 만나기로 한날 잠수, Com › 22이별통보를 받았을 때 알아두면 좋은 6가지 팁.

쿨가이 끝판왕 2탄너무 쿨해 시린 남자의 답장.. 옛날에 단기연애애초에 마음이 작았을 때때는 내가 이별을 고하거나 당하면,진짜 진심 미안해서 오히려 대응해주고 다독이거나 돌려돌려말하기식으로 끝났는데,이번에 상대랑은 서로 결혼적..

Comyeongongzip87 무심한 남자친구ㅣ칼답하게 만드는 방법 3가지. 반갑습니다, 이별심리 전문가 상랩입니다. 1월1일 둘이서 여행가고 그 다음날 갑작스럽게 저를 좋아하지않는 생각이 들어서 더이상 만날수가 없다고 카톡이별 통보 받았습니다. 리바운드 관계는 통상 26개월 내 끝나게 되는 특징이 있으며, 연애 심리학 갑작스런 이별 통보 때문에 정신이 없고 이별 하고자 하는 이유를 모르겠다며 하소연 하지만 갑자기 발생하는 이별은 없다고 보는 것이 옳다. 생각의 오류 이별을 통보한 쪽이나 이별을 통보받은 쪽 모두 대부분 이별의 아픔을 겪게 된다.

귀여운 네즈코 일러스트

고프로 시작, 이별 통보에 매달리며 중프저신, 상대방 대체자 부족한 환경에 확률 70% 사회적 지능 낮고 비추하는 남자 5개월동안 무반응으로 일관 제가 무반응의 주인공이 될줄은 몰랐구요, 새로운 사람을 만나고 상대에게 전 연인을 못 잊었다고 솔직하게 말하는 사람은 굉장히 드물죠. 현대 사회에서의 커뮤니케이션 방식은 급격하게 변화해왔습니다. Com › lovesang0 › 224026321170이별통보 읽씹 심리, 무응답이 말하는 진실 네이버 블로그.

그는 나의 일방적인 이별이 같잖았는지 무응답으로 대응했다. 그럼 우리가 다시 싸우고 안 read more. 내가 무언가를 보냈는데 상대방이 읽고 무시를 하게 된다면, 내가 뭔가 실수를 했나. 나는 그 자리에 머물러 있을지라도 상대가 떠나면 더 이상 함께일 수 없고 우리는 이별을 마주하게 된다. 조금이나마 도움이 되었으면 좋겠는 마음을 담아 후기를 적습니다.

도피성 심리 주로 미안함으로 인해서 이별을 통보한 입장에서도 매우 힘들어하는 경우가 많습니다. 이별통보를 받았을 때 알아두면 좋은 6가지 팁 이별통보를 받은 순간부터 상대방과의 연락을 끊으세요, 카톡으로 이별을 통보받는 것은 정말 충격적인 일입니다, 어떤거가 상대방이 더 어이없고 열받을까, 자신의 감정을 정리하고 새로운 시작을 준비하는 시간을 갖으세요.

구라킷 뜻 주로 그 중에서 미안함이 제일 큰 부분입니다. 새로운 사람을 만나고 상대에게 전 연인을 못 잊었다고 솔직하게 말하는 사람은 굉장히 드물죠. 다시 연락해보싶은데 안좋아하는데 잡는게 무슨. 헤어지기로 했다고 이별 증명서에 사인한 건 아니지 않은가. 상대방이 아무리 갑자기 이별통보했다고 할지라도, 그는 이전부터 이별을 조금씩 생각하고 있었을 거예요. 구닝 딸딸이

교도관 산트라스 어제 카톡으로 장문의 이별 통보를 받았습니다. 세상에 아름다운 이별이 존재하기는 할까. 홧김에 남자침구한테 카톡으로 이별통보했는데 이틀만에 카톡읽었더라고요 읽고나서 답장은없고 후회되서 계속 연락해보고 붙잡으려 전화해도 안받고 카톡도 안읽어요. 헤어짐 그 이유에 대해 물었더니 자기 마음이 떴다는게 이유라고 하네요너가 잘해. 현대 사회에서의 커뮤니케이션 방식은 급격하게 변화해왔습니다. 귀멸의 칼날 무한성편 토렌트

군루 퇴각 순서 그이후로 대화를 통해 10일만에 재회 했습니다. Com › yeongongzip › 223277288031이별 후 후회, 늦으면 답 없습니다 회피형 대응 3가지 네이버 블로. 어떤거가 상대방이 더 어이없고 열받을까. 언젠가 블라 눈팅하다가카톡통보에 안 매달리고 바로 수락하면그 사람은 마음이 거기까지다이런 소리 있길래 이해가 안 가서 물어봄나는 차이는. 그럼 우리가 다시 싸우고 안 read more. 고양이 종류 이름

관계중 목조르기 디시 2년을 만나고 이별통보를 카카오톡으로 해. 나는 그 자리에 머물러 있을지라도 상대가 떠나면 더 이상 함께일 수 없고 우리는 이별을 마주하게 된다. Kr › 이별극복가이드이별 극복 가이드 이별을 대하는 태도 및 이별을 받아들이는 방법. 어떤거가 상대방이 더 어이없고 열받을까. 나는 그 자리에 머물러 있을지라도 상대가 떠나면 더 이상 함께일 수 없고 우리는 이별을 마주하게 된다.

구닌조아 sotwe 고프로 시작, 이별 통보에 매달리며 중프저신, 상대방 대체자 부족한 환경에 확률 70% 사회적 지능 낮고 비추하는 남자 5개월동안 무반응으로 일관 제가 무반응의 주인공이 될줄은 몰랐구요. 솔직히 그가 전화해서 ㅆㄴ이라고 저주를 퍼부울 까봐. 리바운드 관계는 통상 26개월 내 끝나게 되는 특징이 있으며. 어떤거가 상대방이 더 어이없고 열받을까. 재회 신호 이것만 알면 100% 알 수 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.