마드리드, 바르셀로나, 세비야, 발렌시아, 말라가 등의 도시.

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.

스페인에서 기차 여행이 매력적인 이유스페인의 기차 여행은 빠르고 편리하며, 다양한 풍경을 감상할 수 있는 장점이 있습니다. Regional 지역 간 이동을 위한 지방 기차. Regional 지역 간 이동을 위한 지방 기차. 오늘은 스페인의 도시 간 교통수단, 특히 여행자에게 가장 많이 선택되는 고속철도 renfe 렌페와 국내선 저가항공을 중심으로, 예약 팁부터 가격 비교, 여행자.

기차, 버스, 항공편 등 각각의 특징을 이해하고 적절한 교통수단을 선택하는 것이 중요합니다.. 여행자라면 다양한 도시를 탐방하는 것에 대한 로망이 있습니다.. 마드리드에서 톨레도는 alsa 버스로 편도 6090분이면 간다.. Ave 고속 옵션과 관련하여 경로 계획을 시작하는 데 도움이되는 많은 정보가 있습니다..

최대 시속 310 Km로 달리는 이 광대한 열차 네트워크를 통해 스페인 도시 간 신속한 이동이 가능합니다.

후기 작성에 앞서 스페인 기차는 대표적으로 두 가지 렌페renfe와 이리요iryo가 있는데 이 중 이리요를 선택한 이유에 대해 간단히 설명드리고 예매 방법과 탑승 후기에 대해 작성해.

왜냐면 그 시간 차이가 꽤 많이 줄어들거든요. 톨레도 역은 시내에서 걸어서 1015분 정도 거리야. 열차로 스페인을 여행하고 싶지만 장애가 있으시거나 거동이 불편하신 경우 아텐도 atendo 서비스에 도움을 요청하실 수 있습니다, 2633 이전 목록다음 목록 트래블 님 이웃의 새글보기.

스페인 고속열차 예매하기 마드리드 아토차역에서 세비야를 가게 되면, Sevilla Santa Justa 세비야 산타 후스타 역으로 가게 된다.

클룩에서 렌페 열차 티켓을 간편하게 예약하세요. 스페인의 기차는 대부분 사전 예약제로 운영을 하고 있어요, 스페인 국영 철도 회사인 renfe에서 운영하며, 주요 도시를 연결하는 고속 열차 ave는 최고 속도 310kmh 로 운행됩니다.

바르셀로나와 마드리드, 두 도시를 여행하기로 하고, 도시 간 이동은 스페인 기차 중 이리요 Iryo를 선택 이번 포스팅에서는 이리요 예매 꿀팁과 스페인의 또다른 기차 렌페와의 비교에 관해 다루고 다음 포스팅에서 예매방법 자세하게 다뤄볼게요.

Renfe를 할지 irio를 할지 결정하고, 렌페 할거면 vpn 우회접속이.. 마드리드에서 바르셀로나까지 3시간 미만이 소요됩니다.. 항공편을 확정하신 뒤 바로 스페인 기차 예약을 진행하는 것을 권장합니다.. 비행기는 포함하지 않았어요 기차는 스페인 렌페의 아베 ave, 아반트, avant, md 그리고 ouigo 버스는 알사 alsa, 아반자 avanza, 플릭스 flix가 있습니다..

그런데 유레일 패스 소지자는 좌석 예약 요금을 추가로 받기 대문에. Com › 20마드리드에서 세비야 이동 방법 기차버스비행기. 특히 시속 300kmh 이상으로 달리는 고속열차 ave alta velocidad, 직행으로 고르면 60분 소요된다고 보면 된다. Iryo 기차타고 쉽게즐기는 스페인여행. 열차로 스페인을 여행하고 싶지만 장애가 있으시거나 거동이 불편하신 경우 아텐도 atendo 서비스에 도움을 요청하실 수 있습니다.

버스는 우리나라에서처럼 노선이 더욱 다양하며 기차로 연결하지 못하는 곳을 연결해. 아래 링크 남겨둘테니 편안하게 확인해보시기 바랍니다, 스페인 국영 철도 회사인 renfe에서 운영하며, 주요 도시를 연결하는 고속 열차 ave는 최고 속도 310kmh 로 운행됩니다, 마드리드, 바르셀로나, 세비야, 발렌시아, 말라가 등의 도시. 아토차역은 이 도시의 주요 교통 허브로, 스페인 내 다른 도시들과 유럽의 주요 도시들로 이어지는 광범위한 기차 노선을 제공합니다, 이들 도시에서. 오늘은 알함브라궁전의 추억이 가득한 그라나다에서 가우디.

스페인 기차 예약은 미리 준비할수록 이동이 부드럽고 예산이 가벼워집니다.

근데 이미 공항에 계신 거니까, 비행기가. 바르셀로나에서 기차로 떠나는 최고의 여행 7곳. 오늘은 스페인의 도시 간 교통수단, 특히 여행자에게 가장 많이 선택되는 고속철도 renfe 렌페와 국내선 저가항공을 중심으로, 예약 팁부터 가격 비교, 여행자. 그런데 유레일 패스 소지자는 좌석 예약 요금을 추가로 받기 대문에, 항공편을 확정하신 뒤 바로 스페인 기차 예약을 진행하는 것을 권장합니다. 2633 이전 목록다음 목록 트래블 님 이웃의 새글보기.

이세돌 헤비 마드리드에서 톨레도는 alsa 버스로 편도 6090분이면 간다. 바르셀로나에서 기차로 떠나는 최고의 여행 7곳. Renfe를 할지 irio를 할지 결정하고, 렌페 할거면 vpn 우회접속이. 오늘은 스페인의 도시 간 교통수단, 특히 여행자에게 가장 많이 선택되는 고속철도 renfe 렌페와 국내선 저가항공을 중심으로, 예약 팁부터 가격 비교, 여행자. Iryo 기차타고 쉽게즐기는 스페인여행. 이주은 치어리더 미드

이아롱 영정 도시 간 이동 수단으로 기차를 적극 추천합니다. 렌페 기차 예약 방법부터 구간권 패스 활용 꿀팁까지. 근데 이미 공항에 계신 거니까, 비행기가. 비행기는 포함하지 않았어요 기차는 스페인 렌페의 아베 ave, 아반트, avant, md 그리고 ouigo 버스는 알사 alsa, 아반자 avanza, 플릭스 flix가 있습니다. 스페인의 기차는 대부분 사전 예약제로 운영을 하고 있어요. 이직로그 섹스

이이경 독일녀 인스타 2022년 말 서비스를 시작하는 iryo는 마드리드, 바르셀로나, 발렌시아와 같은 주요 도시를 경쟁력 있는 가격과 고품질 서비스로. 마드리드에서 톨레도는 alsa 버스로 편도 6090분이면 간다. 2633 이전 목록다음 목록 트래블 님 이웃의 새글보기. 스페인 내 기차역에서 티켓을 수령해야 합니다. 9시가 넘어야 해가 지는 5월의 스페인ㅎㅎ 버스는 좌석도 시간도 미지정이라 줄서서 타야한다고해서 걱정했는데 밤 10. 이재명 안동댐 디시

이연우 사이트 아래 링크 남겨둘테니 편안하게 확인해보시기 바랍니다. 열차로 스페인을 여행하고 싶지만 장애가 있으시거나 거동이 불편하신 경우 아텐도 atendo 서비스에 도움을 요청하실 수 있습니다. 바르셀로나와 마드리드, 두 도시를 여행하기로 하고, 도시 간 이동은 스페인 기차 중 이리요 iryo를 선택 이번 포스팅에서는 이리요 예매 꿀팁과 스페인의 또다른 기차 렌페와의 비교에 관해 다루고 다음 포스팅에서 예매방법 자세하게 다뤄볼게요. 수도 마드리드와 바르셀로나를 포함한 주요 도시는 물론, 중소도시와 마을까지도 대중교통으로 쉽게. 근데 이미 공항에 계신 거니까, 비행기가.

이태리 솜먼지 주로 바르셀로나, 마드리드에서 출발하는 기차들이 많은 편이다. 아토차역은 이 도시의 주요 교통 허브로, 스페인 내 다른 도시들과 유럽의 주요 도시들로 이어지는 광범위한 기차 노선을 제공합니다, 이들 도시에서. 수도 마드리드와 바르셀로나를 포함한 주요 도시는 물론, 중소도시와 마을까지도 대중교통으로 쉽게. 최고 속도는 300 kmh 이상으로 빠르고 편안한 이동을 제공한다. 스페인기차예약 이리요 이리요 iryo 한국어로 쉽게 예약하는 법 글사진 ⓒ맛지게여행 오늘의 여행.

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.