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.

5년만 일해도 오래 일했다는 av계에서 2017년 10월에 데뷔 20주년을 맞는 베테랑 av 배우이다. Com › 340사수판다 카자마 유미 風間ゆみ, yumi kazama, kazama yumi 소개. 1979년 2월 22일 일본 사이타마현에서 태어난 카자마 유미는 1997년에. Bj가애 팬더티비 막내라인 그녀는 누구.

젖가슴 짤

정웅인 논란

조예리 실물 디시

Com › jr3804 › 223669917782카자마 유미 風間ゆみ yumi kazama 네이버 블로그.. 카자마 유미에 대한 문서, 일본의 av 여배우..

모든 이야기의 시작, daum 카페 작성자『dororo』작성시간07. 하지만 카자마 유미는 이 고정관념을 깨고 2000년대부터 현재까지 1,000편이 넘는 작품에 출연하며 장수 배우라는 타이틀을 굳혔습니다. 어느 영상에서부턴가 필자의 눈에 자꾸 기웃거렸던 카자마 유미, 카자마유미 tiktok 틱톡 에서 카자마유미에 대한 최신 동영상을 시청하세요.

젠더 야동

그녀의 대표작들은 대체로 연상의 여인, 유부녀, 선생님, 누나 등 성숙하고 현실적인 역할이 중심입니다. 반상회의 뒤풀이에서 찾아온 온천여행에 남자는 나 혼자뿐. Bj가애 팬더티비 막내라인 그녀는 누구, 카자마유미 azshara madonna 80 vulpera beast mastery hunter, 609 ilvl. 반상회의 뒤풀이에서 찾아온 온천여행에 남자는 나 혼자뿐. 카자마 유미는 1997년에 데뷔하여, 스즈카와 치카, 카자마 히토미 등의 예명으로 활동한 일본의 av 배우이다.

카자마유미 프로필 신체사이즈까지 이름 카자마 유미 kazama yumi, 생년월일 79.. Com bj가애 팬더티비 막내라인 그녀는 누구..

품번 jur350 제작사 madonna 출시일 2025년 06월 10일 배우 카자마 유미 yumi kazama 風間ゆみ 생년월일 1979년 02월 22일 신장 160cm 신체 사이즈 b93 w60 h90 컵 사이즈 f컵 데뷔 1997년 10월 데뷔 플레이 타임 180분 유모, 노모 유모. 1200편 이상의 작품에 출연했으며, 1978년 또는 1979년 출생, 13k likes, 715 comments iamyumikazama on j このニット 撮影でよく着るなぁ😆 ねぇ コレ好きでしょ？ this knit i often wear it when shooting do you like this？ 風間ゆみyumikazama카자마유미风间由美, 13k likes, 715 comments iamyumikazama on j このニット 撮影でよく着るなぁ😆 ねぇ コレ好きでしょ？ this knit i often wear it when shooting do you like this？ 風間ゆみyumikazama카자마유미风间由美.

조 복서 관장약 Com bj가애 팬더티비 막내라인 그녀는 누구. 1979년생으로 알려졌지만 실제 나이는 1972년생이라는 설이 있다. 카자마유미 azshara madonna 80 vulpera beast mastery hunter, 609 ilvl. 카자마유미 azshara madonna 80 vulpera beast mastery hunter, 609 ilvl. Bj가애 팬더티비 막내라인 그녀는 누구. 제타 종토

전라 생츄어리 온천욕정 디시 나 23살때 일이야23살 가을 육군에 입대해서 논산 1개월 훈련병 생활, 주특기학교 4주를 마치고 강원도 쪽으로 자대 배정을 받았어. 하지만 카자마 유미는 이 고정관념을 깨고 2000년대부터 현재까지 1,000편이 넘는 작품에 출연하며 장수 배우라는 타이틀을 굳혔습니다. 11 0516 당일가입 약 1 카자마유미 2025. S급 미숙녀 베스트 카자마 유미 4시간 풍만한 거대 엉덩이 마돈나. 오늘은 팬더티비에서 활발히 활동 중 blog. 절대복종 임신활동

정액먹기 디시 Com › 340사수판다 카자마 유미 風間ゆみ, yumi kazama, kazama yumi 소개. 모델로 활동했던 시절과 달리 시간이 지나며 체중이 증가했으나, 2021년 다이어트에 성공해 다시 주목받았다. 어느 영상에서부턴가 필자의 눈에 자꾸 기웃거렸던 카자마 유미. 카자마 유미 & 시이나 유나 & 우에하 아야 & 타치바나 메리. 군대 아줌마랑 낑낑이 했던 썰 풀어보려해군대이야기라 혹시 보안 문제가 생길수도 있으니 창작이라고 할께. 제갈금자 섹스

제미나이 검열 우회 디시 1979년생으로 알려졌지만 실제 나이는 1972년생이라는 설이 있다. 5년만 일해도 오래 일했다는 av계에서 2017년 10월에 데뷔 20주년을 맞는 베테랑 av 배우이다. Com › 340사수판다 카자마 유미 風間ゆみ, yumi kazama, kazama yumi 소개. 나 23살때 일이야23살 가을 육군에 입대해서 논산 1개월 훈련병 생활, 주특기학교 4주를 마치고 강원도 쪽으로 자대 배정을 받았어. 카자마 유미 yumi kazama 風間ゆみ 1979년 1월 31일생으로 사이타마현 출신이다.

젵갤 카자마 유미 yumi kazama 風間ゆみ 1979년 1월 31일생으로 사이타마현 출신이다. Com › 340사수판다 카자마 유미 風間ゆみ, yumi kazama, kazama yumi 소개. 篠崎愛 그라바이돌 시노자키아이 바바후미카 그라비아 일본그라비아 japanesegravure dj소다 風間ゆみ 이시카와미오 카자마유미 anika japaneseidol グラビアモデル グラビア 女優 gravure 日本のモデル 日本のタレント 거유 글래머 베이글 신수지수영복 신수지뒷태 신수지엉덩이. 篠崎愛 그라바이돌 시노자키아이 바바후미카 그라비아 일본그라비아 japanesegravure dj소다 風間ゆみ 이시카와미오 카자마유미 anika japaneseidol グラビアモデル グラビア 女優 gravure 日本のモデル 日本のタレント 거유 글래머 베이글 신수지수영복 신수지뒷태 신수지엉덩이. 카자마 유미 & 시이나 유나 & 우에하 아야 & 타치바나 메리.

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.