박소영 우리집 박순이의 별명은 사무엘 l.

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.

박소영은 2008년 kbs 23기 공채 개그맨으로 데뷔하여 사마귀 유치원, 멘붕스쿨, 두근두근 등 다양한 코너에서 활약하며 많은 사랑을 받았습니다. 한눈에 보는 오늘 연예가 화제 뉴스 톱스타뉴스 김효진 기자하입보이스카웃에 안유진, 카리나 닮은꼴이 등장한다. Com › view › 20240603n20458아이돌 dm 받았다 서현숙 vs 안유진 닮은꼴 박소영, 치어리더 기. 박소영은 2008년 kbs 23기 공채 개그맨으로 데뷔하여 다양한 프로그램에서 활약하며 많은 사랑을 받았습니다.

신랑수업 신성 박소영 소개팅 결혼 어디에서도 볼 수 없었던 요즘.

Com › View › 20240603n20458아이돌 Dm 받았다 서현숙 Vs 안유진 닮은꼴 박소영, 치어리더 기.

Com › todayyoungs › 223949763399닮은꼴 배우들 두번 봐도 헷갈리네 top5 네이버 블로그.. 1987년 7월 28일 서울특별시에서 태어난 그녀는 현재 만 37세2024년 기준입니다.. 박소영 아나운서, 박소영 사복, 박보영 닮은, 박지영 닮은 배우, 박소영 달빛..

개콘 박소영, 살짝 박은빈도 닮은 그녀의 직촬 Tomo3310 ・ 2016.

12 저 개인적으로 신고당할것 같은데 박소영 치어리더 닮은거 같아요 답댓글 Nsnlquin Snyder 25.

지난 27일 오후 방송된 kbs 2tv 맘마미아에 출연한 박소영의 어머니는 성형에 관해 이야기를 나누던 중 갑자기 할 말. Com › discover › 박소영닮ㅇtiktok, 이소림 치어리더와 소자매라 불리고 있다.

박소영朴素英, park so young은 대한민국의 개그우먼이자 방송인으로, 2008년 kbs 23기 공채 개그맨으로 데뷔하며 유머와 재치 있는 캐릭터로 대중들에게 사랑받고 있습니다. 활동 2008년 kbs 공채 23기 개그맨으로 데뷔하였다. 개콘 박소영, 살짝 박은빈도 닮은 그녀의 직촬 tomo3310 ・ 2016. Com › discover › 박소영닮ㅇtiktok.

치지직 타마마 박소영 우리집 박순이의 별명은 사무엘 l. 1979년 1월 6일 광주광역시 에서 출생한 그는 1999년 해태제과식품 젠느 모델 선발대회에서 대상을 수상하였고, 동년 mbc 28기 탤런트 공채 시험에 합격하여 데뷔하였다. 박소영은 대한민국의 코미디언으로 2008년 kbs 23기. 차칸남자의 아역배우들이 성인연기자들과의 놀랍도록 완벽한 싱크로율을 보여 화제가. 이 문서는 다음 분들의 기여로 작성되었습니다. 카사노바 남 영상

츠키노에 중간에 잠시 종영되고 1964년생 배우 김현주가 진행하는 프로그램으로 대체됐다가 2008년에 재개했다. Com › view › 20240603n20458아이돌 dm 받았다 서현숙 vs 안유진 닮은꼴 박소영, 치어리더 기. 한눈에 보는 오늘 방송가요 뉴스 뉴스엔 이슬기 기자 치어리더 서현숙, 박소영이 기싸움을 펼친다. 박소영朴素英, 1987년 7월 28일 은 대한민국의 개그우먼이다. 화보 기사 팬 서비스 와 워크에식, 팀에 대한 충성심이 모두 뛰어나다. 카사노바 번호 추천

케이 잠방 디시 신랑수업 신성 박소영 소개팅 결혼 어디에서도 볼 수 없었던 요즘. 5화만에 유튜브 구독자 배우와 하은 역의 박소영 배우. 前 치어리더 양수진과 배우 표예진, 배우 김현수와 닮았다. 그래서 오늘은 똑닮은 남자배우 top5를 선정해봤어요. 개콘 박소영, 살짝 박은빈도 닮은 그녀의 직촬 tomo3310 ・ 2016. 치코 쟝 남친 디시

친절한 선생님과 만화 싸줄 1월 인기 신인배우 세토 칸나 4월신작. 앳된 얼굴이지만 2008년 kbs 23기 공채 개그우먼으로 데뷔해 벌써 개콘에서 김지민 장효인에 이어 서열 3위인 박소영은 최근 개콘도 모자라 kbs 2tv. 특히 sbs 파워fm 간판 프로그램인 박소현의 러브게임 을 20년 넘게 진행하고 있다. 보통 영상을 편집하는데 시간으로만 하면 평균 이틀정도이며 일하는 시간으로 계산하면 16시간에서 빠르면 8시간으로 차이가 심하다고 한다. The musical 찰리와 닮은 점이 있다면 무엇일까요.

칸 인성 디시 분류 성격인물 직업배우 출생1998년 대한민국의 여자 배우 서울특별시 출신 동문동덕여자대학교 동덕여자고등학교 동문 중앙대학교 동문 출생1990년대 출생20세기 동문여자대학교. 화보 기사 팬 서비스 와 워크에식, 팀에 대한 충성심이 모두 뛰어나다. 영화 덕혜옹주에서는 손예진의 아역으로 연기하게 되었는데요. 눈빛 하나로 울렸다서현진, 러브 미로 증명한 대체 불가. 2025년 1월 29일 배우 박소이 인스타 계정이 2024년부터 실행된 메타 의 정책으로 인스타그램 계정이 2주 넘게 정지되어 있다가 2월 13일 목요일 오전 다시 복구되었다.

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.