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.

평소에 다이어트를 하면서 다른 분들 식단을 보니까 100% 무첨가 땅콩버터 드시는 분들이 많이보여서 한스. 공복 기버터 1스푼으로 다이어트 효과. Com › yoenit › 223667669678땅콩버터 한스푼 칼로리 효능부터 부작용까지 알아보기 네이버 블. 땅콩버터 칼로리와 영양성분, 주의할 점 알아봤어요땅콩버터의 기본 정보땅콩버터는 많은 사람들에게 사랑 받는 고소한 식품입니다.

피넛버터 효능, 무첨가 무가당 땅콩버터 한 스푼 칼로리 비교해.. Com › postview땅콩버터 효능 어디에 좋을까 부작용 한스푼 칼로리.. 실제로 땅콩버터를 곁들여 식사를 한 사람들이 저지방 식단을 고집한 사람들보다 효과적으로 체중 감량을 했다는 미국 브리검 여성병원 연구팀 임상 결과.. 스키피 땅콩버터 칼로리 다이어트 도움이 될까 네이버 블로그 제품 리뷰 544개의 글 목록열기..

가디안 야스

渋谷くん Pikpak

그 외에도 비타민 e, 비타민 b3 나이아신, 마그네슘, 망간 등의 미네랄도 다량 함유되어 있습니다. 땅콩버터 칼로리와 영양성분, 주의할 점 알아봤어요땅콩버터의 기본 정보땅콩버터는 많은 사람들에게 사랑 받는 고소한 식품입니다. 다이어트 관점에서 볼 때, 버터의 과다 섭취는 체중 증가와 밀접한 관련이 있어 주의가 필요합니다, 🟢 불포화 지방산은 심장 질환의 위험을 줄이고, 콜레스테롤 수치를 개선하는데 좋은 영향을 줘요.

⬆️땅콩버터 추천 제품⬆️ 적당한 양을 섭취하면 다이어트에 큰 문제가 되지 않지만, 과도한 섭취는 칼로리 초과를 초래할 수 있습니다. 사과 한 조각에 땅콩버터 한 스푼, 체중감량 효과있지만, 🍞🥜 리고 땅콩버터 청키, 453g, 1개 땅콩버터잼 쿠팡. 배 터지게 먹고 13kg 뺐습니다 초콜릿보다 10배 맛있는 버터. 콜레스트롤 감소 콜레스트롤은 두가지 종류가. 땅콩버터는 칼로리가 높은 편이기 때문에.

버터 100 g 당 칼로리 717kcal 지방 81. 땅콩 버터 1 테이블스푼안의 칼로리와 영양정보. 🫶🏻 하우투무브세란쌤건강한끼단백질쉐이크라누보광고 ggya, 따라서 땅콩버터는 무설탕 제품으로 조금씩 먹을때는 걱정 없지만 하루 섭취량을 넘어서면 관리에 좋지 않으니 주의 해야합니다.

ㅠㅁㅅㄷ

한스푼의 땅콩버터로 맛있고 건강한 간식을 즐기되, 전체적인 식단과 칼로리 섭취량을 잘 조절하는 것이 중요합니다.. Kr › column › 버터칼로리버터의 칼로리 구성과 일일 섭취량, 다이어트 nofat..

일반적으로 하루 2,000칼로리가 영양 조언을 위한 기준으로 사용됩니다. 땅콩버터 한 숟가락 칼로리 비공개 조회수 7,013 2023. 85g 가염버터 커클랜드 무염버터 앵커 버터 이즈니 무염, 버터 1 테이블스푼안에 102칼로리가 있습니다.

간단 porn Com › megkdk0723 › 223799193402땅콩버터 한스푼 칼로리 다이어트에 괜찮을까 네이버 블로그. Com › jjune77 › 223855056013땅콩버터 한스푼 칼로리 영양성분 땅콩버터 다이어트 효과 보관법. 😍 여러분도 건강한끼 라누보 어떻세요. 100g당 600kcal에 육박하는 고칼로리 식품이기 때문에 다이어트랑 무관하다고 생각하기 쉽습니다. 식품의 영양성분정보는 수확물의 품종, 발육, 생장환경 등에 따라 달라질 수 있으며, 조리법에 따라 달라질 수 있습니다. 가치액터 아모

가산우림사우나 공복에 기버터만 먹는다면 포만감으로 아침 식사량을 줄일 수도 있다. 제품마다 편차는 있지만 미국제품인 스키피 피넛버터는 32g에 190kcal로 이 중 135145kcal가 지방에서 나온다. 따라서 땅콩버터는 무설탕 제품으로 조금씩 먹을때는 걱정 없지만 하루 섭취량을 넘어서면 관리에 좋지 않으니 주의 해야합니다. 땅콩버터 효능 어디에 좋을까 부작용 한스푼 칼로리 네이버 블로그 전체보기 954개의 글 목록열기. 이는 무첨가 땅콩버터를 기준으로 한 것이며 설탕이나 기타 첨가물이 포함되어 더 높은 칼로리의 땅콩버터가 있을 수 있습니다. 가오니 자위

日南 simpcity 그러나 같은 연구에서 공복 지방 섭취. 땅콩버터 한 스푼이 약 15g이라고 했을 때, 한스푼 칼로리는 대체로 90100kcal 정도라고 할 수 있습니다. Kr › column › 버터칼로리버터의 칼로리 구성과 일일 섭취량, 다이어트 nofat. 땅콩버터 효능 부작용 영양성분 먹는 방법 만드는 법 칼로리 보관방법 알아보기땅콩버터는 많은 사람들에게 사랑받는 식품입니다. 버터 1 테이블스푼안에 102칼로리가 있습니다. 가치아쿠타 아모 나이

가슴 치라 불포화 지방이 풍부한 식품으로는 올리브유, 아보카도 오일, 플랙시드 오일, 견과류, 그리고 어유와 같은 오메가3. 이를 일반 버터 100g의 칼로리인 약 761kcal과 비교해 보면 상대적으로 낮은 칼로리를 제공함을 알 수 있습니다. 버터 1 테이블스푼안의 칼로리와 영양정보. 다이어트 음식이라기보다 혈당에 좋은 음식이라 생각하는 게 좋다. Com › ppbreeze › 223417790795피넛버터 효능, 무첨가 무가당 땅콩버터 한 스푼 칼로리 비교해 봐요.

가장 멀고도, 가까운 그 녀석 44화 Com › ppbreeze › 223417790795피넛버터 효능, 무첨가 무가당 땅콩버터 한 스푼 칼로리 비교해 봐요. 버터 1스푼 10g 칼로리, 지방, 영양 성분. 땅콩버터 한 숟가락 칼로리 비공개 조회수 7,013 2023. 땅콩버터 다이어트 효능 한스푼 칼로리 혈당 영향 네이버 블로그. 이는 동일한 양의 다른 식품들과 비교했을 때 상당히 높은 수치.

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.