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.

Com › best › 5616358084중앙대 총학생회 페미 근황&mldr. 자궁에서 임신 대비했는데 안해서 무너뜨린 일종의 폐기물을 왜 깨끗한 피정혈 이라고 말하는지 모르겠네. Net › name › 52676315왜 생리라 안하고 정혈이라 하는겨 인스티즈 instiz 익명잡담 카. 버튜버 전문 채널 후원투네이션 stoon.

Pikpak えす

25 1828 불건전한 페미니즘 용어를 사용해서 학생들의 세뇌와 사회 분란을 조장 한 의도로 판단 총학생회 해체와 관련자 처벌에 관해서 논해야.. 궁금해서 네이버에 페미 단어 검색해봤는데 무슨 단어들이 이렇게 저렴하지..

Porn Fantia

Com › mgallery › board페미가 쓰는 정혈이라는 말 나만 웃기냐 트위터 마이너 갤러리, 버튜버 전문 채널 후원투네이션 stoon. Com › watch페미 1타 강사 조선생 정혈이 뭔가요. 1 정혈 정액의 미러링으로 생리혈을 일컫는 말. Com 으로 지원 동기를 적어 보내주세요, 자궁x 생리x 포궁o 정혈o 포텐 터짐 최신순.

페미가 쓰는 정혈이라는 말 나만 웃기냐 트위터 마이너 갤러리. 후기정혈컵 메루나 m, s, 페미사이클 이야기들 티스토리. 페미위키 사용자 열심 그리고 페미위키 사용자 사회인권, 낙엽1124, 자댕, 한남재기해 별도로 명시하지 않은 경우, 내용은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 저작자표시동일조건변경허락 4. 리제 생방 중 갑자기 드릉드릉 대표적인 페미 용어인 정혈 사용, Com › best › 5616358084중앙대 총학생회 페미 근황&mldr. 정혈월경어플에서 사용자에게 보내는 알림 혹은 업체의 발언에 대한 논란.

정혈 이란 단어 썼으니 페미 라는 논리는 비약이 심함 저것만으론 페미가 아닐 가능성을 닫아버리지 못함 방송에서 보여지는 모습이 전부 철저한 이미지 컨트롤이라 치더라도 전생관련한 추가 증거들이 합리적이네 04. 페미뉴이어와 함께하는 여성기업💸 여자들의 신년회에 오면. 버츄얼 스나 갤러리 설정 연관 갤러리 31 갤주소 복사 이용안내 🔥염상 드릉드릉 정혈 용어 사용했던 이하난 이하난 아카네리제 ㅇㅇ 2024.

걍 유툽 보다가 그 채널 주인이 말하는건 생리컵이라 하는데 자막엔 정혈컵이라 쓰더라고.. 중앙대 학생회에서 정혈 단어 썼다고 몇몇 남자들이 난리쳤.. 14 181332 삭제 숲갤러1949..

Pikpak 小千

후기정혈컵 메루나 m, s, 페미사이클 이야기들 티스토리, Kr › @mmieumm › 1513. 페미 1타 강사 조선생 정혈이 뭔가요.

pristine edge porn videos 본인은 신경을 안써서 상관이 없었습니다. 댓글로 가기 241 best 파이어인더애스홀 2023. 버츄얼 스나 갤러리 설정 연관 갤러리 31 갤주소 복사 이용안내 🔥염상 드릉드릉 정혈 용어 사용했던 이하난 이하난 아카네리제 ㅇㅇ 2024. 25 1828 불건전한 페미니즘 용어를 사용해서 학생들의 세뇌와 사회 분란을 조장 한 의도로 판단 총학생회 해체와 관련자 처벌에 관해서 논해야. Com 으로 지원 동기를 적어 보내주세요. qwer 꼭지

private bunny by sanjuurou 정혈월경어플에서 사용자에게 보내는 알림 혹은 업체의 발언에 대한 논란. 정혈이라는 단어는 생리라고 말하지 않아도 될 기회를 주는 느낌이다. 숏컷 여자가 학생회장 선거나오면 페미관련 얘기 한마디도 안해도 페미충. 지난 2017년 식품의약품안전처는 월경컵 페미사이클femmycycle의 사용을 처음. 페미가 쓰는 정혈이라는 말 나만 웃기냐 트위터 마이너 갤러리. pikpak nude dance

pikpak 先生 제품 사용 설명서에는 나와있지 않은, 실제 사용 과정에서 겪을 수. Net › name › 52676315왜 생리라 안하고 정혈이라 하는겨 인스티즈 instiz 익명잡담 카. 19 2251 나도 원래 중도좌파라고 나름 스스로 생각했어. 방금 유튭보고 정혈대가 페미용어라는건 알았오근데 왜 생리대가 왜. 페미 1타 강사 조선생 정혈이 뭔가요. ppv 2754780

pikpak 黒ギャル 정혈 이란 단어 썼으니 페미 라는 논리는 비약이 심함 저것만으론 페미가 아닐 가능성을 닫아버리지 못함 방송에서 보여지는 모습이 전부 철저한 이미지 컨트롤이라 치더라도 전생관련한 추가 증거들이 합리적이네 04. 숏컷 여자가 학생회장 선거나오면 페미관련 얘기 한마디도 안해도 페미충. 역시 정혈의 리제 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 기대를 져버리지 않는구나. 수정기간이 지나서 떨어져나오는 폐기되어야 할 조직들이 달마다 주기에 맞게 자연스럽게 흘러나오는 거라 월경이라고 하고. Com › mgallery › board페미가 쓰는 정혈이라는 말 나만 웃기냐 트위터 마이너 갤러리.

pikpak こての 하지만 페미사이클을 사용한 이후와 이전의 경부의 모양이 달라진 건 사실. Com › best › 5616358084중앙대 총학생회 페미 근황&mldr. 본인은 신경을 안써서 상관이 없었습니다. 리제와 린 관련해서 흠집내고 페미논란 뒤집어씌우기가 그 방식이 대부분 이런 식임 따라서 취급 안하고 정혈만을 얘기하겠음 선동은 두 글자로도 가능하지만 해명에는 수십 페이지가 필요하다는 점에서 글 분량이 길어도 양해를 바람. 하지만 페미사이클을 사용한 이후와 이전의 경부의 모양이 달라진 건 사실.

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.