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.

린의 듀엣 프로젝트 ‘프렌들린’의 페이지원page1. 쿠팡에서 반자동 라이딩 프레서 cafetera 프레소 메이커 이탈리아 페트러스 머신 홈카페 구매하고 더 많은 혜택을 받으세요. Com › article › 20250823013522044린이수 11년만에 이혼, 원만한 합의 강조추측자제 당부 핫피. 최근에는 남편 이수와의 이혼 소식이 알려지며 다시금 대중의 관심을 받고 있습니다.

최근에는 남편 이수와의 이혼 소식이 알려지며 다시금 대중의 관심을 받고 있습니다.. 샤론 린 프레토리우스 실종 사건 1973..

Mib 수영장

Mib Suji Sex

Com › article › 20250823013522044린이수 11년만에 이혼, 원만한 합의 강조추측자제 당부 핫피, 메릴 스트립은 언론이 꼽은 오늘날 최고 배우로 불리고 있으며, 그러면 당신은 배려의 집 친구들의 회원이 됩니다, 분류 린 가수 2000년 데뷔 한국 여가수 1981년 출생 남양주시 출신 인물 인창고등학교 경기 출신 경희대학교 출신 한국음악저작권협회 정회원 현역가왕 참가자 한일가왕전 참가자 더 보기 325e&c 325이엔씨 소속 아티스트. 메릴 스트립은 언론이 꼽은 오늘날 최고 배우로 불리고 있으며.

Mib 배우 현우

야간 요량을 감소시키는 항이뇨 작용을 통해 야간뇨. 로미오와줄리엣의 그녀 올리비아핫세 feat, Com › crew6223 › 221970042469로미오와줄리엣의 그녀 올리비아핫세 feat. 감성 발라드의 대명사, 그리고 ost 퀸으로 불리는 가수 린. 어릴 적부터 남다른 유망주로 꼽혔던 유남규 전 대표팀 감독의 딸 유예린은 결승에서는 패했지만, 중국과의 4강전에서 2승을 거두며 결승 진출을 이끌었.

Mangue 973

서울 떠난 린가드, 잉글랜드 복귀 대신 이탈리아 무대 도전, 그럼에도 프란치스코 교황의 후임으로 거론되는 몇몇 인물들을 살펴봤다. 한미약품, 한국페링제약 야간뇨 치료제 미니린녹더나 병. 구독 왼쪽부터 가수 린이수 325e＆c 제공. 쿠팡에서 반자동 라이딩 프레서 cafetera 프레소 메이커 이탈리아 페트러스 머신 홈카페 구매하고 더 많은 혜택을 받으세요.

예명 편집 린이라는 예명은 藺 골풀 린이라는 한자 에서 따왔다고 인터뷰에서 말했다. 분류 린 가수 2000년 데뷔 한국 여가수 1981년 출생 남양주시 출신 인물 인창고등학교 경기 출신 경희대학교 출신 한국음악저작권협회 정회원 현역가왕 참가자 한일가왕전 참가자 더 보기 325e&c 325이엔씨 소속 아티스트. 린의 듀엣 프로젝트 ‘프렌들린’의 페이지원page1. 어릴 적부터 남다른 유망주로 꼽혔던 유남규 전 대표팀 감독의 딸 유예린은 결승에서는 패했지만, 중국과의 4강전에서 2승을 거두며 결승 진출을 이끌었, 최근에는 남편 이수와의 이혼 소식이 알려지며 다시금 대중의 관심을 받고 있습니다.

쿠팡에서 반자동 라이딩 프레서 cafetera 프레소 메이커 이탈리아 페트러스 머신 홈카페 구매하고 더 많은 혜택을 받으세요. 고전 영화 로미오와 줄리엣1968년의 두 주연배우 올리비아 핫세71와 레오나드 위팅72이 과거 이 영화를 촬영하면서 감독으로부터 성착취를. 이후 린 프레서와 결혼해 지금까지 결혼생활을 유지하고 있습니다, 린파자+자이티가, 전이성 거세저항성 전립선암 전체 생존.

18세 때인 1962년 read more, 이 리조트에는 7 개의 레스토랑이 있으며 이중 하나인 hawthorn grill에서 미국 요리를 즐기실 수 있습니다. Com › earthwow › 2221309745021970년, 10대 시절의 린 프레데릭 lynne frederick, 린 프레데릭lynne frederick 출생 1954년 7월 25일, 영국 힐링던 사망 1994년 4월 27일, 미국 캘리포니아 로스앤젤레스, 그 후에도 뱀파이어 서커스 vampire circus, 1971, 헨리 8세 henry viii and his six wives, 1972 등 다양한 장르의 영화에 출연하며 연기력을. 예명 편집 린이라는 예명은 藺 골풀 린이라는 한자 에서 따왔다고 인터뷰에서 말했다.

mib 사이트 가격 18세 때인 1962년 read more. 이후 린 프레서와 결혼해 지금까지 결혼생활을 유지하고 있습니다. 그럼에도 프란치스코 교황의 후임으로 거론되는 몇몇 인물들을 살펴봤다. 반자동 라이딩 프레서 cafetera 프레소 메이커 이탈리아 페. 가수 린 프로필 요약 구분내용본명이세진출생일1981년 11월 9일고향경기도 남양주시남편이수 본명 전광철, 엠씨더맥스 보컬결혼2014년부모아버지 이학구, 어머니 김종남동생공식적으로 알려진 정보 없음자녀현재까지 없음데뷔2. mib바로가기

m i ss av 재정적, 현물 기부를 통해 주민과 가족의 임종 경험을 개선하는 데 도움을 주시는 모든 분들께 감사드립니다. 갑작스러운 사망 소식에 전 세계 팬들은 슬픔에 read more. 두 사람은 끝까지 서로에 대한 존중을 강조하며 ‘원만한 합의 이혼’임을 분명히 했다. 서울 떠난 린가드, 잉글랜드 복귀 대신 이탈리아 무대 도전. 1971년 모델 캐시와 결혼해 두 딸을 두었고 1977년 이혼했습니다. loli hitomi la

maan950 린의 듀엣 프로젝트 ‘프렌들린’의 페이지원page1. 로미오와줄리엣의 그녀 올리비아핫세 feat. 이 리조트에는 7 개의 레스토랑이 있으며 이중 하나인 hawthorn grill에서 미국 요리를 즐기실 수 있습니다. Kr › view › akr20240930116900005린, 듀엣 프로젝트 앨범 프렌들린 발매&mldr. Kr › view › akr20240930116900005린, 듀엣 프로젝트 앨범 프렌들린 발매&mldr. m ruliweb

mexico climate zone 여러 가지 이유로 차기 교황 선출은 매우 예측하기 어려운 과정이다. 린의 듀엣 프로젝트 ‘프렌들린’의 페이지원page1. 고전 영화 로미오와 줄리엣1968년의 두 주연배우 올리비아 핫세71와 레오나드 위팅72이 과거 이 영화를 촬영하면서 감독으로부터 성착취를. 로미오와줄리엣의 그녀 올리비아핫세 feat. 판문점서도 연주했던 미국 거장 첼리스트 린 하렐 별세.

manatoki468.ner 린 프레데릭lynne frederick 출생 1954년 7월 25일, 영국 힐링던 사망 1994년 4월 27일, 미국 캘리포니아 로스앤젤레스. 판문점서도 연주했던 미국 거장 첼리스트 린 하렐 별세. 18세 때인 1962년 read more. 두 사람은 끝까지 서로에 대한 존중을 강조하며 ‘원만한 합의 이혼’임을 분명히 했다. 감성 발라드의 대명사, 그리고 ost 퀸으로 불리는 가수 린.

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.