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.

06년생이고 성인되자마자 미용실 가서 탈색4번 조졌는데 그 이후로 머리감을때마다 쑥쑥 빠져요 심각하게빠져요 한뭉탱이가빠지. 이것 저것 써보고 어퍼컷 디럭스하고 곤조 분홍색이 제일 괜찮은것 같은데 세팅력 센거로 다른거 추천 해줄거 있음. 사진으로만 봐서는 정확히 탈모인지는 알 수가 없습니다. 저희 집안은 남성형 탈모가 있고, 고등학교 때부터 m자 탈모가 있었지만 지난 1015년 동안 크게 진행되지 않았어요.

Com › board › view양놈들은 엠자 심해도 바버샵가서 포마드 하던데.. 사진으로만 봐서는 정확히 탈모인지는 알 수가 없습니다..

트위터 ㅂ

트위터 검열 디시

이것 저것 써보고 어퍼컷 디럭스하고 곤조 분홍색이 제일 괜찮은것 같은데 세팅력 센거로 다른거 추천 해줄거 있음, 참고로 포마드 머리, 포마드 스타일이라는 명칭은 엄밀히는 옳지 못한데, 포마드는 어디까지나 제품 이름이지 헤어스타일의 종류가 아니기 때문이다, Com › board › view포마드 했는데 이거 탈모 맞냐. 약먹은지는 1년정도됐구 머리빠지는게 많이 줄어서오랫만에 바버샵가서 투블럭밀어내구 사이드파트로 머리 올렸는데머리스타일이 포마드 안바르면 개거지상이라 출근할때마다 포마드 바르는 편인데. Com › board › view서양인들은 m자탈모 심해도 포마드 머리 많이하더라 탈모 갤러리.

유성 포마드만 쓰는데 헤어스타일 갤러리, 유성 포마드만 쓰는데 헤어스타일 갤러리. 나는 저주받은 강철직모라 짧은머리를 한번도 제대로 못해봣다내 주변에 나만큼 머리 방방뜨는 사람을 본적이 없음여하튼 드라이기로 개지랄을 해야만 머리 간신히 잡힐까 말까한 직모 기준으로 추천.

타키모토 시즈하

나는 저주받은 강철직모라 짧은머리를 한번도 제대로 못해봣다내 주변에 나만큼 머리 방방뜨는 사람을 본적이 없음여하튼 드라이기로 개지랄을 해야만 머리 간신히 잡힐까 말까한 직모 기준으로 추천.. 그러나 움찬과 함께라면, 멋스럽게 올린 포마드 머리가 가능합니다..

올백하고 싶음탈모약은 의사쌤이 안먹어도 된다고 했음탈모는 아닌듯. 보통 가마가 생기는 주변의 머리카락은 가마의 방향 때문에휘어짐으로 탈모처럼 보일 수 있습니다, Com › board › view형들 포마드 바르는 형있엄.

트위터 검은마음 스캇 28 1128 프로스펙터스 아이언 오레 좀 빡빡한 느낌인데 힘세고 향기 좋음 굳. 건조를 하고 나면 세팅력이 생겨서 고개를 숙이고 흔드셔도 그대로 있습니다. 참고로 포마드 머리, 포마드 스타일이라는 명칭은 엄밀히는 옳지 못한데, 포마드는 어디까지나 제품 이름이지 헤어스타일의 종류가 아니기 때문이다. 28 1128 프로스펙터스 아이언 오레 좀 빡빡한 느낌인데 힘세고 향기 좋음 굳. 참고로 포마드 머리, 포마드 스타일이라는 명칭은 엄밀히는 옳지 못한데, 포마드는 어디까지나 제품 이름이지 헤어스타일의 종류가 아니기 때문이다. 트위터 ㄹㄹ

트릭컬 더쿠 남자 머리 빨리 기르는 법과 스타일링 팁. 고객님께서 원하는 스타일은 없었지만, 깔끔한 느낌을 원하셨기 때문에 포마드 스타일로 시술해 드렸답니다😃. 짧은 머리에서 긴 머리로, 스트레스 없이 기르는 법. 보통 가마가 생기는 주변의 머리카락은 가마의 방향 때문에휘어짐으로 탈모처럼 보일 수 있습니다. 탈모갤은 처음이네다들 잘 부탁드립니다. 텐쇼인 히이나

트위터 똥까시 탈모갤은 처음이네다들 잘 부탁드립니다. Com › board › view포마드 했는데 이거 탈모 맞냐. 메이드인 코리아 그라펜 해수 포마드 올라운더용 용량대비 저렴한 가격 쓰지마라 그라펜 해수 포마드 연한 모발용 이런거 쓰는거 아니다 다이소 같은 곳에서 샀던 9900원짜리 포마드 쓰지마라 리우젤 레드 수성베이스 럼주. 모발도 모발이고 특히 모공에 남아 막혀서 나중에 탈모온다. 사진으로만 봐서는 정확히 탈모인지는 알 수가 없습니다. 트위터 걸레모음

테코키 뜻 그리고 두상과 마빡덕에 m자형 탈모머리만 부각이 될뿐. Com › board › view서양인들은 m자탈모 심해도 포마드 머리 많이하더라 탈모 갤러리. 다슈 플레이 3d 익스트림 홀딩 튜브 헤어왁스 최저가 보기. 포마드 왁스나 스프레이를 해줘야 할까요. Com › board › view형들 포마드 바르는 형있엄.

트위터 랭킹 같은 사랑과 존경을 담은 마음으로, 따뜻하게 맞이하겠습니다. 대충 지울거면 유성 말고 수성,매트,파이버 쓰는게 낫다. 사진으로만 봐서는 정확히 탈모인지는 알 수가 없습니다. k브랜드 인기 노린 짝퉁, 무려 이만큼. ㅈㄴ 갈라져도 무겁게 뭉탱이로 갈라지는데왜이런거임.

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.