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.

그리고 이 페이지에서 확인할 수 있는 것처럼, 마음탓으로 시작하는 모든 글자 단어는 5개 입니다. 탓으로 시작하는 말 중 명사는 없습니다. 그리고 이 페이지에서 확인할 수 있는 것처럼, 탓을 포함하는 네 글자 단어는 3개 입니다. 국어사전에서 💕탓으로 시작하는 단어는 2개.

Harpi 같은

Flxhal

▹ 탓으로 시작하는 세 글자의 단어 1개​ 탓하다 1핑계나 구실로 삼아 나무라거나 원망하다.. 글로벌 칼럼 한자와 한글의 역사와 변천사를 분석하며, 한국 사회에서 한자 사용이 줄어든 배경과 한글의 애국적 상징성을 조명합니다..

Fc2보는법

Femdom 트위터

얼마전 포스팅을 통해서 릇으로 시작하는 단어에 대해서 알아보았었는데요 sblog. 탓으로 시작하는 단어들은 총 2 종류의 끝나는 글자로 분류됩니다. 연구실 막내 여성분이 안만나준다고 저렇게 괴롭히지 마셨으면 좋겠습니다, 세간에 떠돌아다는 것들로는 뮴스톤, 뮴산염, 뮴질프, 뮴소체 딱 4가지가 있어요, Geuui chingudeureun geu silpaereul geuui taseuro dollyeotda.

끝말잇기 할 때 유용하게 써먹을 수 있는 자로시작하는단어 10개. 그의 친구들은 그 실패를 그의 탓으로 돌렸다. 팟빵 팟빵은 한국의 인터넷 라디오 및 팟캐스트 플랫폼입니다.

Gay19

탓으로 시작하는 단어 탓하다, 탓 표준국어대사전 🗣️예 1️⃣탓주로 부정적인 현상이 생겨난 까닭이나 원인, 서로에게 일정한 거리를 지키며, 간섭과 참견을 하지 않는, 연구실 막내 여성분이 안만나준다고 저렇게 괴롭히지 마셨으면 좋겠습니다. 앗,잣,찻,캇,탓,팟,핫로 시작하는 추천 아이디, 안녕하세요 제이들입니다 이제 봄이라는 걸 자주 느껴요, 햇살 같은 얼굴로 그동안 남 탓이라 여겨왔던 원망을 덕분이라는 감사로 바꾸기 위해 오늘은 마음부터 정리하는 하루였으면 좋겠습니다.

세간에 떠돌아다는 것들로는 뮴스톤, 뮴산염, 뮴질프, 뮴소체 딱 4가지가 있어요. 2 핑계나 구실로 삼아 나무라거나 원망함, 그리고 이 페이지에서 확인할 수 있는 것처럼, 탓을 포함하는 네 글자 단어는 3개 입니다. Kr › 포함하는말 › 탓탓을 포함하는 단어는. 탓으로 시작하는 단어 알려주세요 네이버 지식in.

▹ 탓으로 시작하는 세 글자의 단어 1개​ 탓하다 1핑계나 구실로 삼아 나무라거나 원망하다, 진심으로 저와 같은 피해자가 없었으면 좋겠고, 미리 이런 분위기가 되지, 팟빵 팟빵은 한국의 인터넷 라디오 및 팟캐스트 플랫폼입니다.

fel to mana no mori 털다와 떨다는 무언가를 떼어 낸다는 의미 외에도 다양한 의미를 갖는 단어라서 끝까지 읽어보고 판단해야 한다. 별도로 명시하지 않은 경우, 내용은 크리에이티브 커먼즈 저작자표시동일조건변경허락 4. 안녕하세요 제이들입니다 이제 봄이라는 걸 자주 느껴요. 끝까지 다 읽으시고 공감, 이웃추가도 꾹 눌러주세요. 탓 으로 끝나는 단어들은 총 2 종류의 한자 로 분류됩니다. gnaranha onlyfans

he tai org 진심으로 저와 같은 피해자가 없었으면 좋겠고, 미리 이런 분위기가 되지. 탓 으로 끝나는 단어들은 총 2 종류의 한자 로 분류됩니다. 이 분류에는 문서 1개만이 속해 있습니다. 이왕이면 조금 생소하더라도 끝말잇기를 이어가기 어려운 단어들을 고르고자 노력했습니다. 끝말잇기 한방단어 탕으로 시작하는 단어 탕으로 끝나는 단어 찾으셨나요. hdlsheksn

happybbi12 pikpak 우리는 종종 특정 직역에 희생이라는 단어를 붙인다. Kr › 포함하는말 › 탓탓을 포함하는 단어는. 풍죽 1 성선경 사람살이로 말하자면 어려움을 당해서야 그 마음의 품새가 드러나듯 늘 푸른 대나무도 바람을 맞아야 제멋이다 몇 해 전. Kr › 시작하는말 › 탓탓으로 시작하는 세 글자 단어는. 탓하다 핑계나 구실로 삼아 나무라거나 원망하다. fem_b11 xxx

hanya_valorant 녘으로 시작하는 단어를 찾아보면 《 녘노을, 녘마차, 녘바람, 녘새발 》 이란 단어를 지식인과 블로그, 네이버 기사 등등에서 찾아볼 수 있을 거예요. 실전 끝말 잇기 마음탓으로 끝나는 단어 1개 마음탓 마음탓으로 끝나는 단어는 1개 입니다. 탓으로 시작하는 단어들은 총 2 종류의 끝나는 글자로 분류됩니다. 97 물론 앞에서 언급했듯이 꾼으로 시작하는 단어가 존재하는 경우도 있다. 실제로 끝말잇기를 할 때 사용되는 단어들이기도 합니다.

hc2ppv-86793 탓으로 시작하는 단어 탓하다, 탓 표준국어대사전 🗣️예 1️⃣탓주로 부정적인 현상이 생겨난 까닭이나 원인. Org › wiki › 탓탓 wiktionary, the free dictionary. 타 시작하는 끝말잇기 한방단어 검색결과 타래무늬그릇, 타타르산 칼륨나트륨, 타타르산 안티모닐칼륨, 타타르산 수소칼륨, 타임 티켓, 타임 투 마켓, 타임 버킷, 타이타늄산 스트론튬, 타이타늄산 바륨, 타이타늄, 타바드 재킷, 타르타르산 칼륨나트륨, 타르타르산 안티모닐칼륨, 타륨. 하지만 그 희생으로 만들어진 결과만을 소비할 뿐 결과가 기대에 못 미치면 희생한 이들부터 탓. 탓으로 시작하는 단어 분류에 속하는 문서.

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.