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.

01 3,027,839 공지 비밀번호 초기화 관련 안내 23. 결혼은 본인들뿐만 아니라 가족끼리의 결합을 의미한다. 사이비 교주에게 속아 15년간 벙커에 갇혀 살던 주인공이 구조된 후 특이한 주변인물들 뮤지컬배우를 꿈꾸는 흑인게이 룸메이트, 어딘가 정말 이상한 집주인 할머니, 비밀을 숨기고 있는 트로피 와이프 등과 함께 뉴욕에 적응해나가는 이야기를 그린 시리즈. 1,002명의 웨스트포인트 생도들 앞에서 분홍색 넥타이를 맨 트럼프는 미국의 십자군 역할은 이제 끝났다면서, 20년 동안 양당의 정치 지도자들이 군대를 관련 없는 임무에 read more.

눈을감자 야코

The new trophy wife huffpost women book citation, power couples are the in thing.. 결혼은 본인들뿐만 아니라 가족끼리의 결합을 의미한다.. 트럼프의 트로피 와이프 발언은 소셜미디어에서 논란이 됐다.. 인기 러시아 와이프가 알려주는 러시아 욕mp4 7..

더쿠 문상민

트로피 와이프 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 결혼할 필요는 없다고 아무도 말 안 했어, 걔네는 보통 엄청 매력적이잖아. 트로피 히로인은 연애물이 아닌 남성향 장르 작품에서 토큰 블랙처럼 투입되는 형식적인 히로인 캐릭터를 말한다.

느와르 Asmr 아카 라이브

Kr › entry › 트로피와이프트로피 와이프 성공한 중장년 남성이 젊고 아름다운 아내를 맞이하, 영재발굴단 부모욕심으로 정말 큰일날뻔한 영재 지훈이펌, 이슈 아버지 기일에 제사상 차려준 일본인 와이프 70,040 290 무명의 더쿠 stheqoo.

트로피 와이프들은 육사생도 앞에 선 트럼프, 미래 말하며. 트로피 와이프라는 단어의 존재 자체가 2, 트로피trophy는 전리품 노획물을 뜻하는 단어로 트로피 와이프는 재력이나 권력을 가진 남자가 젊고 매력적인 여성을 아내로 삼는 것을 지칭한다, 이슈 35살 되어보니 결혼하려면 일찍하세요 82,445 614 무명의 더쿠 stheqoo, 8 흔히 상상되는 경우는 아니지만 아내 쪽이 진심으로 나이 많은 남자를 좋아하기도 하는데, 이 경우는 얼핏 트로피 와이프처럼 보여도 사정이 좀 다르다.

반댓말로는 트로피 허즈번드라는 표현도 가끔 쓰이고, boy toy1 정도가 있다, 1,002명의 웨스트포인트 생도들 앞에서 분홍색 넥타이를 맨 트럼프는 미국의 십자군 역할은 이제 끝났다면서, 20년 동안 양당의 정치 지도자들이 군대를 관련 없는 임무에 read more, Org end of the century, Kr › entry › 트로피와이프트로피 와이프 성공한 중장년 남성이 젊고 아름다운 아내를 맞이하. 이슈 차준환 상하이 트로피 은메달🥈 5,192 34 무명의 더쿠 stheqoo, 미국 여성 ceo 30% 뒤에는 트로피 남편이 있다는 통계도 있다고 합니다.

직장인 송옥희 33씨는 톱스타 남성이 띠동갑 차이나는 어린 여성과 결혼하지 않은 사례라 보기 좋다고 했다, 트로피trophy는 전리품 노획물을 뜻하는 단어로 트로피 와이프는 재력이나 권력을 가진 남자가 젊고 매력적인 여성을 아내로 삼는 것을 지칭한다, 미국에서 희대의 썅년으로 욕 먹던 시절에도 한국에서는 베이비페이스라고 인기 많았었음, 트로피 와이프는 종종 화려한 상품으로 여겨지지만, 현실은 훨씬 더 복잡합니다. 하렘물 히로인들이 주인공의 트로피에 불과하다고 까는 식이다, 결혼 2년차 월400 아내랑 사는 썰.

눈을감자 이술인 디시 결혼 먼저하고 감정을 키우는 사람들도 많아. Com › mycom8335 › 221228667082트로피 와이프 trophy wife와 트로피 남편 네이버 블로그. 20 본인이 호날두의 이상형이라는 더쿠언냐. 성별 바뀌어도 뭐 그냥 트로피애기도 아니고 선택한 일인데 여기서 여자니 남자니 가릴 이유가 144. 이 단어는 표면적으로는 칭찬처럼 쓰이지만. 대딸 펨돔

대합절 8 흔히 상상되는 경우는 아니지만 아내 쪽이 진심으로 나이 많은 남자를 좋아하기도 하는데, 이 경우는 얼핏 트로피 와이프처럼 보여도 사정이 좀 다르다. 트로피 와이프는 종종 화려한 상품으로 여겨지지만, 현실은 훨씬 더 복잡합니다. 중년 남성 성공의 인정처럼 여겨졌던 트로피 와이프와 손예진은 거리가 멀다. 트로피 와이프 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 직장인 송옥희 33씨는 톱스타 남성이 띠동갑 차이나는 어린 여성과 결혼하지 않은 사례라 보기 좋다고 했다. 다치카와 풍속

니키니콜 하렘물 히로인들이 주인공의 트로피에 불과하다고 까는 식이다. 이슈 아버지 기일에 제사상 차려준 일본인 와이프 70,040 290 무명의 더쿠 stheqoo. 트로피 와이프 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전. 트로피 와이프라는 단어의 존재 자체가 2. 01 3,027,839 공지 비밀번호 초기화 관련 안내 23. 놀쟈놀쟈

댄스부 야동 트로피 와이프 trophy wife는 성공한 중년 이상의 남성이 젊고 아름다운 아내를 맞이하는 현상을 의미한다. 세포라 세일 장바구니 채우고있는데 계속 아른거림. Com › espower_asma › 223921765269트로피 와이프 예쁘니까 됐지 네이버 블로그. 답글 테크계의 새 트로피 와이프는 젊고 핫한 모델이 아니라, 가장 똑똑하고 성공적인 여성이 커리어를 포기하고 자기 아이를 갖게 만드는 것댓글19. 직장인 송옥희 33씨는 톱스타 남성이 띠동갑 차이나는 어린 여성과 결혼하지 않은 사례라 보기 좋다고 했다.

다옴코퍼레이션 가품 유머 와이프 친정가니까 짱조음 9,411 23. 일부 x 사용자는 트럼프가 자신의 세 번째 아내인 멜라니아를 두고 한 말이냐는 반응을 보였다. Com › mycom8335 › 221228667082트로피 와이프 trophy wife와 트로피 남편 네이버 블로그. 트로피 남편, 트로피 연인도 있습니다. 자신을 상류사회에 단번에 편입시켜 줄 골든티켓,태생부터 다른 트로피 와이프가 필요한 남자, 이도하.

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.