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.

Com › item › 罗马数字罗马数字_百度百科. 数字被写成重复的符号，以代表数字的总和。 例如，iii代表3。 较小的数字写在较大数字的右边，代表它们的总和，如viii代表8，xii代表12。 较小的数字（仅限于i、x和c）写在大数字的左边，代表差额，如iv代表4，ix代表9。 在正常使用中，重复符号不应超过3次。. 今天我们称它为数字，为了写小数，我们需要它。 大数. 关于罗马数字对照表 11000 从1到1000完整的罗马数字对照表.

디시 너붕 조교

罗马人为了记录数字，便在羊皮上画出ⅰ、ⅱ、ⅲ来代替手指的数；要表示一只手时，就写成ⅴ形，表示大拇指与食指张开的形状；表示两只手时，就画成ⅴⅴ形，后来又写 read more.. 如今我们最常见的罗马数字就是钟表的表盘符号：i（1）、ii（2）、iii（3）、iv（4）、v（5）、vi（6）、vii（7）、viii（8）、ix（9）、x（10）、xi（11）、xii（12）。 我家钟表..

동남아 꿀통 디시

도쿄 핀사로 위치

This page provides detailed information about roman numerals, including their origin, usage rules, and examples of numbers written in roman style, Com罗马数字 在线转换,罗马数字和阿拉伯数字对照表, Org › zhhans › 罗马数字罗马数字 维基百科，自由的百科全书. 罗马数字i,ii,iii怎么打出来要打出罗马数字i、ii、iii，可以直接在键盘上输入对应的小写英文字母i和v来表示。具体为：输入一个i表示罗马数字的1（i），输入两个i&. 1、2、3、4、5、6、7、8、9的 罗马数字 分别是i、ii、iii、iv、v、vi。iv、vii、viii、ix。 罗马数字是欧洲在 阿拉伯数字 （实际上是 印度数字）传入之前使用的一种数码，现在应用较少。它的产生晚于中国 甲骨文 中的数码，更晚于埃及人的十进制数字。但是，它的产生标志着一种古代文明的进步。只是. 罗马数字对照表 我们提供常用1至100的罗马数字对照表和其他罗马数字表。 你也可以通过简单地输入起始和结束数字来自定义生成的罗马数字对照表。 下面是一个罗马数字对照表，它提供罗马数字符号和它们相应的值：.

디시 젠지

罗马数字使用了7种符号，其中每个符号对应的阿拉伯数字为：i 1、v 5、x 10、l 50、c 100、d 500、m 1000，其它罗马数字均有这7种符号组合而成，常见的罗马数字、计算公式和阿拉伯数字对照表如下所示, 罗马数字 i， ii， iii 分别代表什么？解析罗马数字的基本规则 你是否曾在古老的电影中看到罗马数字，或是在一些历史书籍里翻阅时注意到那些神秘的符号？比如，‘i’，‘ii’，‘iii’这些看似简单的字母背后究竟藏着怎样的数字含义呢？不用担心，今天我们就一起来解析一下这些古老的符号. 2025 baidu 使用百度前必读 百度首页 问题反馈 商务合作 关注微博.

最常见的罗马数字就是钟表的表盘符号：ⅰ、ⅱ、ⅲ、ⅳ、ⅴ、ⅵ、ⅶ、ⅷ、ⅸ、ⅹ、ⅺ、ⅻ 元素周期表：ia族，iia族，iiia族，iva族，va族，via族，viia族，ib族，iib族，iiib族，. 今天我们称它为数字，为了写小数，我们需要它。 大数. 整理從 1 到 100 的羅馬數字與阿拉伯數字對照表。 這張表格中包含了從 1 到 100 的羅馬數字與阿拉伯. 羅馬數字冇「0」。 一般認為羅馬數字只用來記數，唔係運算。 譬如今年係2026年，用羅馬數字寫就係「mmxxvi」。 另一個成日見羅馬數字嘅地方就係鐘面或者錶面，例如右圖，用嚟表示時間嘅一至十二分別寫做： i, ii, iii, iv, v, vi, vii, viii, ix, x, xi, xii. 羅馬數字者，古羅馬國之數碼也。西人嘗以之記數，而今罕用。 西洋鐘常刻以羅馬數字.

罗马数字 i， ii， iii 分别代表什么？解析罗马数字的基本规则 你是否曾在古老的电影中看到罗马数字，或是在一些历史书籍里翻阅时注意到那些神秘的符号？比如，‘i’，‘ii’，‘iii’这些看似简单的字母背后究竟藏着怎样的数字含义呢？不用担心，今天我们就一起来解析一下这些古老的符号.. 罗马人为了记录这些数字，便在羊皮上画出 ⅰ、ⅱ、ⅲ 来代替手指的数；要表示一只手时，就写成ⅴ形，表示大指与食指张开的形状；表示两只手时，就画成ⅴⅴ形，后来又写成一只手向上、一只手向下的ⅹ，这就是罗马数字的雏形。.. 最常见的罗马数字就是钟表的表盘符号：ⅰ、ⅱ、ⅲ、ⅳ、ⅴ、ⅵ、ⅶ、ⅷ、ⅸ、ⅹ、ⅺ、ⅻ 元素周期表：ia族，iia族，iiia族，iva族，va族，via族，viia族，ib族，iib..

던만추갤

例如，iii代表3。 2、較小的數字寫在較大數字的右邊，代表它們的總和，如viii代表8，xii代表12。 3、較小的數位（僅限於i、x和c）寫在大數字的左邊，代表差額，如iv代表4，ix代表9。 4、在正常使用中，重複符號不應超過3次。. 职位头衔里的罗马数字（i, ii, iii）是什么意思？, 数字被写成重复的符号，以代表数字的总和。 例如，iii代表3。 较小的数字写在较大数字的右边，代表它们的总和，如viii代表8，xii代表12。 较小的数字（仅限于i、x和c）写在大数字的左边，代表差额，如iv代表4，ix代表9。 在正常使用中，重复符号不应超过3次。, 3w次，点赞12次，收藏57次。本文介绍如何在latex文档中使用 omannumeral和uppercase命令转换阿拉伯数字为小写及大写罗马数字，并提供了一个表格演示从1到10的阿拉伯数字对应的罗马数字形式。.

덕코프 3인칭 모드 关于罗马数字对照表 11000 从1到1000完整的罗马数字对照表. They are an additive and subtractive system in which letters are used to denote certain base numbers, and arbitrary numbers are then denoted using combinations of symbols. 和声学中用罗马数字标记和声级数：ⅰ、ⅱ、ⅲ、ⅳ、ⅴ、ⅵ、ⅶ各对应一级、二级、三级、四级、五级、六级、七级。 对应阿拉伯数字：ⅰ、ⅱ、ⅲ、ⅳ、ⅴ、ⅵ、ⅶ、ⅷ、ⅸ、ⅹ、ⅺ、ⅻ对应1. 有序 列表 （ordered list）的编号（多用 小写字母），例如： i 第一项 ii 第二项 iii 第三项 iv 第四项 v 第五项 vi 第六项 vii 第七项 viii 第八项 ix 第九项 x 第十项 xx 第二十项 wwi 、 wwii 化学 中标注元素的 化合价态 会使用罗马字母. 3w次，点赞12次，收藏57次。本文介绍如何在latex文档中使用 omannumeral和uppercase命令转换阿拉伯数字为小写及大写罗马数字，并提供了一个表格演示从1到10的阿拉伯数字对应的罗马数字形式。. 도우코토 야스

드래곤 플라이트 갤 罗马数字数字列表。 也可以看看 希腊字母符号 罗马数字转换器 罗马数字可打印图表 如何将数字转换为罗马数字 如何将罗马. Unfortunately, little is known about the origin of the roman numeral system cajori 1993, p. 罗马数字罗马数字是古罗马时期的计数系统，也是最早的数字表示方式，多用于钟表、日历和章节编号。一般认为，罗马数字只用来计数而不作演算。像ii，iv，vii，这些都是常见的罗马数字。 构造规则1、罗马数字通过7个. 最常见的罗马数字就是钟表的表盘符号：ⅰ、ⅱ、ⅲ、ⅳ、ⅴ、ⅵ、ⅶ、ⅷ、ⅸ、ⅹ、ⅺ、ⅻ 元素周期表：ia族，iia族，iiia族，iva族，va族，via族，viia族，ib族，iib族，iiib族，. 有序 列表 （ordered list）的编号（多用 小写字母），例如： i 第一项 ii 第二项 iii 第三项 iv 第四项 v 第五项 vi 第六项 vii 第七项 viii 第八项 ix 第九项 x 第十项 xx 第二十项 wwi 、 wwii 化学 中标注元素的 化合价态 会使用罗马字母. 덱스 고추

데이 식스 담배 디시 数字被写成重复的符号，以代表数字的总和。 例如，iii代表3。 较小的数字写在较大数字的右边，代表它们的总和，如viii代表8，xii代表12。 较小的数字（仅限于i、x和c）写在大数字的左边，代表差额，如iv代表4，ix代表9。 在正常使用中，重复符号不应超过3次。. 最常见的罗马数字就是钟表的表盘符号：ⅰ、ⅱ、ⅲ、ⅳ、ⅴ、ⅵ、ⅶ、ⅷ、ⅸ、ⅹ、ⅺ、ⅻ 元素周期表：ia族，iia族，iiia族，iva族，va族，via族，viia族，ib族，iib族，iiib族，. 小提示 mcmlxxxiv 1984 m1000. Word文档中怎么快速输入罗马数字ⅰ ⅱ ⅲ. 职位头衔里的罗马数字（i, ii, iii）是什么意思？. 두부asmr 야동

도우 시노 미약 罗马数字 i， ii， iii 分别代表什么？解析罗马数字的基本规则 你是否曾在古老的电影中看到罗马数字，或是在一些历史书籍里翻阅时注意到那些神秘的符号？比如，‘i’，‘ii’，‘iii’这些看似简单的字母背后究竟藏着怎样的数字含义呢？不用担心，今天我们就一起来解析一下这些古老的符号. 1、2、3、4、5、6、7、8、9的 罗马数字 分别是i、ii、iii、iv、v、vi。iv、vii、viii、ix。 罗马数字是欧洲在 阿拉伯数字 （实际上是 印度数字）传入之前使用的一种数码，现在应用较少。它的产生晚于中国 甲骨文 中的数码，更晚于埃及人的十进制数字。但是，它的产生标志着一种古代文明的进步。只是. Unfortunately, little is known about the origin of the roman numeral system cajori 1993, p. I，iv ，iii，ii，iiv是罗马数字。对应阿拉伯数字，也就是现在国际通用的数字为：ⅰ是1，ⅱ是2，ⅲ是3，ⅳ是4，ⅴ是5，ⅵ是6，ⅶ是7，ⅷ是8，ⅸ是9，ⅹ是10。可以通过打开软键盘打出罗马. 罗马数字120的写法如下： i 1 unus ii 2 duo iii 3 tres iv 4 quattuor v 5 quinque vi 6 sex vii 7 septem viii 8 octo ix 9 novem x 10 decem xi 11 undecim xii 12 duodecim xiii 13 tresdecim xiv 14 quattuordecim xv 15 quindecim xvi 16 sedecim xvii 17 septendecim xviii 18 duodeviginti xix 19 undeviginti.

디시 세나리 Guide › howromannumeralswork罗马数字如何运作 romannumerals. I、ii、iii、iv、v、vi出自罗马数字，vi表示6，后面接vii，表示数字7。 罗马的个位数举例：. Com › item › 罗马数字罗马数字_百度百科. Com › question › 2056197780805071467如何输入大写罗马数字（ⅰ，ⅱ，ⅲ_百度知道. 罗马数字1到10怎么打罗马数字1到10的写法：i,ii,iii, iv,v,vi, vii,viii,ix, x在工作中经常使用到罗马数字1到10，总不能大家在用的时候来复制吧，今天小编就和大家一起来学习罗马数字1到10怎么打出来。.

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.