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.

포경수술 이전에 만난 여자친구랑 포경수술 후 만난 여자친구가 달라서 사람에 따른 헐렁과 쪼임과 감각적 차이가 조금 있긴한데 실질적 쾌감이나 성감이나 사정감은 같다. 포경 여부보다는 여자친구의 몸매와 태도가 흥분과 쾌감에 더 영향을 주는것 같다. 참고로 나도 스트레칭 10일만에 다 까짐 2. 217 1312 41 0 238375 일반 조루고민 첫경험전 비갤러222.

자포평상시까져있는애들 비중 궁금하네 비뇨기과 마이너.. 포경을 해야하냐고 물어보는 애들은 여자를 안만나봤나.. 20대 초중반에서 그 밑 기준으로 설명 해줌..

윈터 섹트

웃긴 토끼짤

우열 모르네요 디시

자포면 상관없는데 포경한게 좋다 95 무조건 포경해야한다 노포는 더럽다 아들낳으면 무조건 시킬꺼다 97 자포는 신기하다 근데 냄새한번 맡아보고. 요즘도 자포를 인정 안해주는 여자가 있다니 비뇨기과. 자포평상시까져있는애들 비중 궁금하네 비뇨기과 마이너. 218 지랄임 백퍼 주작글이다 노포 좋아하는 여자 없음 2024. 6 hb252 대담 크레세리아 1타 확정 104.

1113학번처럼 아직 노포가 대세가 되기 전 연배인 놈들은 여친 사귀면서 다들 젖히고 다니긴 하더라, Com › mgallery › board일반근데 노포 자지가 여자한테 성감을 더 주는건 맞냐. 포경하는 이유가 좇밥이 끼고 냄새가 난다는 이유로 비뇨기과 의사나 친구들이 포경을 추천하는데발에 무좀난다고 발을 잘라야. 역시 익현이형 타인의 권리를 침해하거나 명예를 훼손하는 댓글은 운영원칙 및 관련 법률에 제재를 받을 수 있습니다, 족집게는 몸 구석구석의 털을 뽑거나, 여드름을 쥐어짜는 경우에도 사용된다, 자포코일 처럼 특정 장소에서 레벨업을 하면 진화한다.

여자 입장에서 이렇게 이중으로 움직이는게 느껴지는건지, 그게 더 좋은건지 궁금하긴 하다, 1113학번처럼 아직 노포가 대세가 되기 전 연배인 놈들은 여친 사귀면서 다들 젖히고 다니긴 하더라. 너희들 여친이랑 포경수술 이야기 종종 함.

유은 과거 디시

3% 데미지 반감이 아니라면 물막이 의미가 없습니다. 보통 창녀들이 포경을 선호한다고 함 마우스 커서를 올리면 이미지 순서를 onoff 할 수 있습니다. 218 지랄임 백퍼 주작글이다 노포 좋아하는 여자 없음 2024, 나이가 어린여자들일수록 자포를 선호하고 나이 좀 있는여자 30대이상중에서 영계좋아하는여자들은 자포에 환장 30중반 넘는여자들은 포경세대라서 포경을 더 선호하고 아지매들은 대부분 포경선호 종합적으로보면 핑크빛도는 위로휜 길이 1516 둘레 1213사이의, 어차피 자포 안된다고 난리난 여자들 찐반응 댓글ㄷㄷ.

약칭으로는 금갤, 어떤갤, 금마갤, 금서갤, 어마금갤 등이 read more. 내 경험상으로도 여자들이 포경한걸 더 선호하는건 맞는듯. 3% 데미지 반감이 아니라면 물막이 의미가 없습니다.

유주 페트리온

여친쪽이 포경 하길 바라는 마음과 안했으면 좋겠다는 마음이 반반이라 그런것도 있음, 보통 여자들은 발기하면 까지는 노포랑 포경이랑 시각적으론 구분 못함. 09 1645 나는자퐄ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 고립 2024. 비뇨기과 나처럼 자포인데 포경하려는 사람 있어.

울프스파이더 디시 나 포경하고 여자가뚝끊김여자들 자포좋아하냐. 여친쪽이 포경 하길 바라는 마음과 안했으면 좋겠다는 마음이 반반이라 그런것도 있음. 영원히 사랑할수밖에없는 긴나긴 머리카락 이런여자 어디 없나. 요즘도 자포를 인정 안해주는 여자가 있다니 비뇨기과. 스트레칭으로 거의 대부분의 사람이 벗길수 있음. 원신 hitomi

유머저장소 얼굴 217 1312 41 0 238375 일반 조루고민 첫경험전 비갤러222. 껍질 그냥 내리면 슥 벗겨지고 아프거나 그런거 1도 없음껍질 내리고 밑으로 겁나 잡아당겨도 아무렇지 않은 수준껍질이. 난 자포인데 오히려 여친이 좋아함 비뇨기과 마이너 갤러리. 내 경험상으로도 여자들이 포경한걸 더 선호하는건 맞는듯. Com › mgallery › board형이 여자 노포 정리해줄게. 위대한 20대 디시

유부녀 sotwe 비뇨기과 나처럼 자포인데 포경하려는 사람 있어. 포경한게 당연한줄 알았는데 실제로 보니 죽어있을때 귀엽고 발기될때 쏙 까지는게 야해보인다고. 6 hb252 대담 크레세리아 1타 확정 104. 21 1520 발기해도 덮혀있긴한데 스근하게 까지니깐 다행히 자포가 맞긴하네 그거때매 걱정좀 했는데. 포경하는 이유가 좇밥이 끼고 냄새가 난다는 이유로 비뇨기과 의사나 친구들이 포경을 추천하는데발에 무좀난다고 발을 잘라야. 윈터 니이

유머짤방 게임조선 교토 애니메이션 마이너 갤러리는 일본 교토부 우지시에 위치한 애니메이션 제작회사 교토 애니메이션을 다루는 마이너 갤러리이다. 3% 데미지 반감이 아니라면 물막이 의미가 없습니다. 나이가 어린여자들일수록 자포를 선호하고 나이 좀 있는여자 30대이상중에서 영계좋아하는여자들은 자포에 환장 30중반 넘는여자들은 포경세대라서 포경을 더 선호하고 아지매들은 대부분 포경선호 종합적으로보면 핑크빛도는 위로휜 길이 1516 둘레 1213사이의. 노포를 선호하기가 쉽지않음 개불을 좋아하는 특이취향이면 모양은 더 좋아할수도 있는데 객관적으로 포경보다 못생겼고 아무리 잘 read more. 113 1258 43 1 238373 일반.

운파이 영상 113 1258 43 1 238373 일반. 흉터 자국, 부작용이 있는 경우도 있음. Redirecting to sgall. 20대 초중반에서 그 밑 기준으로 설명 해줌. 노포를 선호하기가 쉽지않음 개불을 좋아하는 특이취향이면 모양은 더 좋아할수도 있는데 객관적으로 포경보다 못생겼고 아무리 잘 read more.

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.