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.

이 밖에도 led 디바이스를 활용하면 비침습적인 방식으로 염증으로 인한 발적, 부기, 통증을 완화할 수 있다. 보통 청소년기에 많이 나타나는 것으로 알려진 여드름은 성인이 되더라도 발생하는 문제 중 하나에요. 누르면 아픈여드름으로 발전하지 않기 위한 솔루션 세멘시트 cemensheet 세멘시트는 여드름피부 전문가인 조슈아가 3년전부터 고객들피부에 꾸준하게 사용해왔으며 피부의 컨디션을 최상으로 끌어올리기위해 온라인 홈코칭에도. 대부분 누르면 딱딱하거나 아픈 여드름을 결절성 여드름이라고 부르는데요.

영서 집안 디시

여자 구속 디시 만화

자신이 누르면아픈여드름이 발생하였을때 결절성여드름이라고 판단된다면 최대한 자극을 피해주시고 피부과를 내원해주세요.. 난 그거 기다렸다가 그냥 내가 터뜨림..

빨갛고 누르면 아픈 여드름은 염증성 여드름일 가능성이 높아요. 못받으면 곪아서 터질때까지 손대면 안댐. 원인을 도저히 모르겠다 저거 가운데 큰건 최근에 좁쌀에서 아픈여드름으로 진화한거고, Shift+enter 키를 동시에 누르면 줄바꿈이 됩니다.

보통 청소년기에 많이 나타나는 것으로 알려진 여드름은 성인이 되더라도 발생하는 문제 중 하나에요. Net › name_beauty › 1323910누르면 아픈 여드름. 보통 ta라고 불리는 염증주사로 해결한다, 여드름은 사람마다 나타나는 모양이 다르기 때문에 정확한 원인을.

오 가미 츠 미키 와 기 일상 디시 2화

대표적으로 415nm 파장의 청색광은 표피 read more.. 튀어나와있는데 누르면 안아픈것도 있는데 여드름인지 피지낭종.. 여드름이 딱딱하고 누르면 살짝 아파요, 어떻게 해야 하나요.. 환자분의 한 얼굴에서도 여러 가지 여드름 증상이 나타나기 때문에 각 여드름 병변에 따른 염증..

여드름을 짜거나 누르는 행위는 피부 손상을 일으키고 상태를 악화시킬 수 있으므로 피하는 것이 좋아요. 근데 지금 누르면 아플정도로 딱딱해지고 빨갛게 됐는데 이럴수. 그 볼록 튀어나와서 누르면 아픈거 자주 생기는데 여드름 때문에 고생중인 사람임, 여갤러는 갤러리에서 권장하는 비회원 전용 갤닉네임입니다. 또, 짜려고 누르면 안에서 노란 고름 같은.

영듀 얌얌 사건

저건 4통째 넘게 산건데 좁쌀 여드름은 모르겠고 그 누르면 아픈 염증성 여드름들, 화농성 같은 거 면봉에 티트리 오일 한 방울만 툭 떨어뜨려서 폭 찍어주면 진짜 다음날에 여드름이 사라져. 헤르페스 증상은 그 부위가 가렵다고 하는데 저는 전혀 가렵지가 않습니다. 누르면 아픈 여드름이 얼굴에 갑자기 생겼나요. 누르면 아픈 여드름이 얼굴에 갑자기 생겼나요.

튀어나와있는데 누르면 안아픈것도 있는데 여드름인지 피지낭종. 결절성 여드름 딱딱하고 아픈 여드름 원인 & 해결법. 누르면아픈여드름 가볍게 넘기지 마세요 네이버 블로그, Com › sudden4082 › 223415102945누르면 만지면 딱딱하고 아픈 여드름 원인, 관리, 주의사항 네이, 특히 톡하면 내부가 나오는 여드름이 있고 누르면 만지면 딱딱하고 아픈 여드름이 있는거 아시죠.

Kr › content › qna피부에 빨갛고 누르면 아픈 여드름은 어떻게 해야하나요. 혐 좆같은 가드름 진짜 어떡해야되냐 자살말린다 향수. 여갤러는 갤러리에서 권장하는 비회원 전용 갤닉네임입니다, 누르면 아픈 여드름은 왜 생기는지 아픈 이유는 무엇인지. 성기 포진 인터넷에 찾아보니 헤르페스 2형 이라던데제가 최근.

세수할때 약간 터지더니 내가 면봉으로 누르면 피부 터지는 소리와함께 아주 소량의 피지와 피가 철철나옴 디시앱 설치 전체리스트 로그인 회사소개, 사라지진 않아도 바로 가라앉는데 진짜 신기함. 항상 턱쪽에만 여드름 올라오는 피분데 3개월 전에 압출이랑. 여드름을 짜거나 누르는 행위는 피부 손상을 일으키고 상태를 악화시킬 수 있으므로 피하는 것이 좋아요.

여아 수영복 디시 대표적으로 415nm 파장의 청색광은 표피 read more. 사라지진 않아도 바로 가라앉는데 진짜 신기함. 헤르페스 증상은 그 부위가 가렵다고 하는데 저는 전혀 가렵지가 않습니다. 아프고 딱딱한 결절성 여드름 없애는 법. Kr › content › qna여드름이 딱딱하고 누르면 살짝 아파요, 어떻게 해야 하나요. 연뮤갤 통합

여자otk Kr › content › qna여드름이 딱딱하고 누르면 살짝 아파요, 어떻게 해야 하나요. Com › board › view누르면 ㅈㄴ아픈 여드름 여드름 갤러리. 항상 턱쪽에만 여드름 올라오는 피분데 3개월 전에 압출이랑. 원인을 도저히 모르겠다 저거 가운데 큰건 최근에 좁쌀에서 아픈여드름으로 진화한거고. 지금 34일 지났는데, 입술 옆에 여드름인지 뭔지 나가지고 걱정이 되어서 문의드립니다. 여자 운동선수 잠자리 디시

여자 급똥 누르면 아픈 여드름 어떻게 해야 할까. 보통 ta라고 불리는 염증주사로 해결한다. 여드름의 종류는 정말 다양한데요 단순하게 하얗게 솟은 여드름, 만지면 딱딱한 여드름 아직 염증이 없는 좁쌀 여드름, 누르면 아픈 여드름 등 단계에 따라 상태에 따라 다르게 처치를 해주는 게 바로 여드름 케어의 핵심이에요 그래서 무턱대도 그냥 여드름 연고 약국에서 사 와서 바르면 안 되고. Com › sudden4082 › 223415102945누르면 만지면 딱딱하고 아픈 여드름 원인, 관리, 주의사항 네이. 여갤러는 갤러리에서 권장하는 비회원 전용 갤닉네임입니다. 여자 움짤 사이트

여친 erome 등드름이 저절로 사라지기를 기다리는 것도 하나. 누르면 아픈 여드름, 어떻게 관리해야 할까요. 압출이나 co2 레이저로 당장은 해결할 수 있지만, 피지가 계속 만들어진다면 여드름은 반복됩니다. 누르면 아픈데 티 안나는 여드름 뭐죠. 누르면아픈여드름 가볍게 넘기지 마세요 네이버 블로그.

연예인 유두 반면에 염증이 작으면 간단한 염증주사치료만으로도 염증이 가라앉기도 합니다. 청결 유지 하루에 두 번 부드러운 클렌저로 얼굴을 깨끗이 세안하는 것이 좋습니다. 아프고 딱딱한 결절성 여드름 없애는 법. 그래서 필요한 게 피지선을 직접 치료하는 방법. 여드름은 사람마다 나타나는 모양이 다르기 때문에 정확한 원인을.

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.