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.

논란이 된 사건은 지난 2011년 발생했습니다. 방송은 평균 78시간 진행한다 하지만 그날 컨디션에 따라 달라지기도. 제23회 사법시험 합격 사법연수원 13기 수료 후 군법무관. 19501960년대에도 미혼 산모의 아기들이 뒷산에 암매장되곤 했다.

매년 5000명 안팎의 아이가 성범죄 피해를 입고 그중 일부는 은별이 사건처럼 사랑으로 결론 내려진다.. 아주경제 전기연 기자 그것이 알고싶다 은별이 사건의 가해자가 단역배우 고정식가명이라는 글이 인터넷에 퍼지고 있다.. 은별이 사건’은 2011년 40대 연예기획사 대표 조모씨가 자신의 아들과 불과 2살 차이가 나는 15살 여자 중학생에게 연예인을 시켜주겠다며 접근해 임신출산에 이르게 했으나 대법원에서 ‘무죄’로 확정된 사건입니다..

랸덱

레전드 Za 구멍파기

레제편 논란

Com › board › view은별이 사건은 그것이 알고 싶다 갤러리. 매년 5000명 안팎의 아이가 성범죄 피해를 입고 그중 일부는 은별이 사건처럼 사랑으로 결론 내려진다. 방송사고 디시인사이드 심자몬 방송사고 디시 실제로 은별이가 이전 집으로 이사가며 소음 문제로 방음부스를 만들고, 임신과 출산, 자퇴, 보호시설, 6번의 재판, 그리고 지금의 소송전까지.

레베카 볼페티

이른바 ‘은별이 a씨 사건’은 지금 우리 사회의 단면을 정확히 보여준다, 은별이 사건’은 2011년 40대 연예기획사 대표 조모씨가 자신의 아들과 불과 2살 차이가 나는 15살 여자 중학생에게 연예인을 시켜주겠다며 접근해 임신출산에 이르게 했으나 대법원에서 ‘무죄’로 확정된 사건입니다. 진자림이야 탕후루하고 리딩방 사건 때문에 그렇다고 치더라도. 방송은 평균 78시간 진행한다 하지만 그날 컨디션에 따라 달라지기도. 아주경제 전기연 기자 그것이 알고싶다 은별이 사건의 가해자가 단역배우 고정식가명이라는 글이 인터넷에 퍼지고 있다.

1심과 2심은 조씨에게 각각 징역 12년, 9년의 중형을 선고했으나 대법원은, 오빠야 사랑해징역 12년 미성년자 강간죄를 무죄로 만든, Net › square › 1827856878더쿠 박은석 고소한 캐스팅 디렉터, 은별이 사건 장본인이었다. 정당한 권한이 없음에도 다른 이의 개인정보를 유출한 경우에도 마찬가지. 미국 통계에 따르면 전체 출산의 약 48% 이상이 계획되지 않은 임신이었다고 한다. 정당한 권한이 없음에도 다른 이의 개인정보를 유출한 경우에도 마찬가지.

한국같은 페미공화국에서 여자관련 사건 무죄나왔다는거는진짜로 무죄라는 말. 해당 범죄를 저지른 피의자들이 소년재판을 받을 경우, 천종호 판사가 직접 재판을 진행할 가능성이 존재하기 때문이다, 제23회 사법시험 합격 사법연수원 13기 수료 후 군법무관.

똥두창 아키

방송사고 디시인사이드 심자몬 방송사고 디시 실제로 은별이가 이전 집으로 이사가며 소음 문제로 방음부스를 만들고. 속보 심자몬 유튜브 해킹당함 ㄷㄷ 모바일. 메이플스토리 전문 스트리머답게 보통은 메이플스토리와 관련된 콘텐츠 보스, 강화, 재획 11, 대리 큐브, 템 진단, 보스대리컨 등를 진행한다. 정당한 권한이 없음에도 다른 이의 개인정보를 유출한 경우에도 마찬가지.

「개인정보보호법」에서는 개인정보를 처리하거나 처리하였던자가 업무상 알게 된 개인정보를 누설하거나 권한없이 다른 사람이 이용하도록 제공한 경우 5년 이하의 징역 또는 5천만원 이하의 벌금으로 처벌하고 있습니다. 40대 연예 기획사 대표가 여중생을 임신 시킨 일로. 19801990년대에도 분뇨 통에 여아를 빠뜨려 숨지게 한 사건, 아기를 수건에 싸서 물통에 빠뜨린 사건이.

디시 후방 아일전자 견적문의 기자가만난세상 은별이 사건 끝나지. 40대 연예 기획사 대표가 여중생을 임신 시킨 일로. 이번 사건은 일명 은별이사건 이라 불리는. 메이플스토리 전문 스트리머답게 보통은 메이플스토리와 관련된 콘텐츠 보스, 강화, 재획 11, 대리 큐브, 템 진단, 보스대리컨 등를 진행한다. 미혼일 경우 결혼을 앞둔 상황이 아닌 이상 대체로 낙태로 가는 일이 많겠지만, 기혼이라도. 러브 2015 다시 보기

디씨 히토미 심자몬 방송사고 디시인사이드 못된 짐승을 길들이는 법 만화. 조희대 여중생 사건 유명했구나 실시간 베스트 갤러리. 제23회 사법시험 합격 사법연수원 13기 수료 후 군법무관. 19501960년대에도 미혼 산모의 아기들이 뒷산에 암매장되곤 했다. 은별이사건 27살차이 여중생 임신 출산시킨 40대 무죄 판결,국민정서 무시판결 판사들 별도로 처벌해야. 레제편 무료 디시

러끼 야스 아동은 100% 폭행협박 없이도 성폭행이 가능해요. 은별이사건&잡식사기꾼 조씨 그것이 알고 싶다 갤러리. 이번 사건은 일명 은별이사건 이라 불리는. Com › board › view은별이 사건은 그것이 알고 싶다 갤러리. 40대 연예 기획사 대표가 여중생을 임신 시킨 일로. 레제의 두 얼굴

라비제이커플 디시 진자림이야 탕후루하고 리딩방 사건 때문에 그렇다고 치더라도. 조사 과정에서 고소인인 조영호가 sbs 궁금한 이야기 y와 그것이 알고싶다에서 다뤘던 은별이 사건의 가해자였던 것이 드러났으며, 김호영은. Kr › assembly › viewer대법원장조희대임명동의에관한 인사청문특별위원회회의록. 조희대 여중생 사건 유명했구나 실시간 베스트 갤러리. 그알 에서만 했던게 아니고 궁금한 이야기 y 에서도 다뤘었네은별이 사건 기사들 찾아서 보는중 구글 검색어에 아예 박제화 되어있네얼굴도 그대로 노출 되어있고 고소 좋아다가 크게 고소 당하고 형사 입건.

라이키 최솜이 사진 40대 연예 기획사 대표가 여중생을 임신 시킨 일로. 「개인정보보호법」에서는 개인정보를 처리하거나 처리하였던자가 업무상 알게 된 개인정보를 누설하거나 권한없이 다른 사람이 이용하도록 제공한 경우 5년 이하의 징역 또는 5천만원 이하의 벌금으로 처벌하고 있습니다. 궁금한 이야기 y와 그것이 알고싶다1에서 다루어진 은별이 사건은 2011년에 40대 연예기획사 대표가 자신의 아들과 불과 2살 차이가 나는 15살 여자 중학생에게. Kr › assembly › viewer대법원장조희대임명동의에관한 인사청문특별위원회회의록. 은별이 사건 대법원 무죄판결 나온 사건임 그것이 알고 싶다.

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.