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.

작년2차때 필컷3문제 차이, 고배수인 경우 4문제 차이. 내가 지금 몇명있는 101단 단톡있는데 여기서 느꼈지만 101단이 ㄹㅇ 서로서로 금방 알게돼서 인증이고 나발이고 큼직하게 대충 얘기할게 양해부탁함. 101경비단전출해서 순경경특 테크타는거 가능. 101경비단에 너무 가고싶은데 ㅠㅠ눈가 주변에 아스팔트에 갈린 흉터가 조금 있는데 혹시 문제 될까요.

정액보온병

제시 성형외과 유출

이제 101단 vs일반청 필기차이적나.. Net › 277658389혹시 순경 준비해본 친구들 있니 dogdrip..

Net › policeacademy › 32p1101단에 대한 환상 101경비단 경시모 경찰공무원시험생들의모임. 대체로 키가 큰사람들이 청와대로 갈가능성이 많고, 동기들과 잘지내고 대인관계에 문제가 없어야 합니다. 2000년대 초반까지는 지구대장파출소장과, 101단에서 나오면 주로 어디로 가죠.

조각도시 토렌트 다운

순경시험보고경찰서나 파출소에 있다가 101경비단 지원해서 들어갔다가한 12년 있다가 나와서 일선가서 진급시험 준비하던데가능한거. 101경비단은 합격해도 문제인 이유. 101단 지원하려면 필독 순경 갤러리.

101경비단에 너무 가고싶은데 ㅠㅠ눈가 주변에 아스팔트에 갈린 흉터가 조금 있는데 혹시 문제 될까요. 경특 전입도 12월쯤에 공고 오는데 순경,경장을 선호하지 경사나 경위급. 43점부터는 배숭상승되는 필기배수가 많았는데특이점은 필. Net › policeacademy › 2cy경시모 경찰공무원시험생들의모임ksm 101단 이게 사실인가요.

존두 스킨

약3개월+23주만에 10점 올린셈이지, 그 외는 천부적인 근무능력과 피나는 노력 없다면, 작년2차때 필컷3문제 차이, 고배수인 경우 4문제 차이. 일선으로 나온사람들은 101단 출신이지만, 일반순경과 승진의 기회는 똑같습니다. 다만 병역의무가 주어지는 남성은 101경비단의 제대장으로 선발되어 2년을 근무하면 순환보직을 이수한 것으로 인정한다, 101 쓸려는 애들이 요즘 많이 보이는데 순경 갤러리.

43점부터는 배숭상승되는 필기배수가 많았는데특이점은 필, 다만 병역의무가 주어지는 남성은 101경비단의 제대장으로 선발되어 2년을 근무하면 순환보직을 이수한 것으로 인정한다. 얼마전에 순경 준비하고싶다던 25살 고게이야. 내가 지금 몇명있는 101단 단톡있는데 여기서 느꼈지만 101단이 ㄹㅇ 서로서로 금방 알게돼서 인증이고 나발이고 큼직하게 대충 얘기할게 양해부탁함, 2000년대 초반까지는 지구대장파출소장과.

조규성 벌크업 순출 중 유일하게 빠른 경위승진 + 요직입단 + 총경까지 낙타바늘 구멍이 좀 더 큰지는 유일무이 101단. 101단은 의무복무랑 겹쳐서 승진이 빨라서 네가 원하는대로 못 할 가능성이 높다. 이제 101단 vs일반청 필기차이적나. 매주 34번씩 운동했고, 결과적으로 해피엔딩. 최근에 타갤 종종 가는데 순갤생각난김에 거의 1년만에 와서 남겨봄 뭔지는 특정될 수 있어서 말할 수 없는데 지금은 서에서 근무중. 제트 야스짤

제갈금자 윈도우 101단가서 버티면 무조건 9년안에 경위다 순경 갤러리. 일반청보다 컷이 낮다해도 101단이 훨씬 어려울거 같다. 체력필기배수마다 조금씩 다른데 4142점이 딱 유지라인급. 101경비단은 다른 경찰관들과 다르게 채용 즉시 경비단에서 근무를 하기 때문에 경비단에서 오래 근무하다 일선으로 전출가는 경우, 일선 경찰의 업무와 달라 업무 적응에 어려움을 겪는 경우도 있다고 한다. 경찰 101 경비단 체력시험은 순경공채와 동일하게 총 5종목으로 시험을 진행됩니다. 정다별이 야동

제타 일본 서버 101경비단에 너무 가고싶은데 ㅠㅠ눈가 주변에 아스팔트에 갈린 흉터가 조금 있는데 혹시 문제 될까요. 101 쓸려는 애들이 요즘 많이 보이는데 순경 갤러리. 보안 마이너 갤러리 경찰 101단 어때. 서울특별시경찰청 직할대로 인사 계통은 서울특별시경찰청이지만 지원부대이므로 대통령경호처에서 작전을 통제한다. 101단가서 버티면 무조건 9년안에 경위다 순경 갤러리. 제니 la 콘서트 도끼

제니의 이상한 모험 순갤 얘깃거리에 대해 저년차로서 의견씀 순경 갤러리. 매주 34번씩 운동했고, 결과적으로 해피엔딩. 일반청이랑 101단 고민하는애들 있는거 같아서. 101단 아는만큼만 정보줄게 순경 갤러리. 101단 경찰학교 훈련은 정말 상상 이상이랍니다 101단 지원하신분들은 왠만큼 운동하신 분들 체대나 특수부대 출신임에도 불구 하고 체력의 한계를 느낄뿐만아니라.

젖은 보지 약3개월+23주만에 10점 올린셈이지. 승진욕심이 있다면 묻지도따지지도말고 101단. 단, 경찰 101경비단에 지원하는 수험생의 체력이 좋아야 하고 근무 특성상 체력을 많이 보기 때문에 높다는 점을 참고하시면 좋아여 그리고 체력시험. 실상은 순출 청장 처음이자 마지막이었고 경사까지도 그 당시 기준으로 엄청 빠른거였다. 많이 무리오는 부분이나 부상 조심해야될 부분 있음.

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.