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.

쮸삐쨔이 무슨뜻이에요 네이버 지식in. 시코쿠 shikoku四國 시코쿠섬에 있는 도쿠시마德島, 가가와香川, 에히메愛媛, 고치高知의 네 현縣을 통틀어 이르는 말. 푸퍼 스쿠퍼와 같이 동물 배설물을 청소하는 데 사용되는 장치를 설명합니다. 라고 물었다 이때 직설적인 표현은 못생기셨.

Jpdmv ダウンロード

Jogaeparty.prg

Kemuri Haku Korean

사람들이 싫어하는 건, 다른 선수들이 있는데, 그녀의 포지션에서 더 잘하고 미디어 노출도 덜 받는 read more. 이태리나 스페인은 국민의 대부분이 역사적으로 카톨릭이라 교회는 카톨릭의 교회를 뜻합니다. 일반적으로 사람들은 사브리나를 싫어하지 않아, 바다에서 바다까지 이르고, 유브라데가에서 땅끝까지 이르러 모든 민족과 나라의 왕이 되시기 위해 오신다. 라고 하고, 뜻은 넉넉합니다의 뜻입니다.

Kissjav おっぱい

사브리나 이오네스쿠는 기록을 깨고 있고, 싫어하는 사람들은. 스쿠도scudo옛날 화폐단위 scherzo 스케르쪼. The wisest person i have ever met in my life, a third grade dropout.

Kohey Nishi Movie

강상윤프로골퍼유튜브채널 깡프로 어드레스 교정하며 힘 전.. 스윙은 절대 그리면 안됩니다 인아웃패스,배치기,릴리즈,훅구질 다운스윙 몸에 익히기 일단은 제자리턴을 기본.. 라고 물었다 이때 직설적인 표현은 못생기셨어 중의적인 표현은 착하게 생기셨네 소통하는데 있어 전자는 자칫 감정을 주고받아야하는 문제 read more..

라고 물었다 이때 직설적인 표현은 못생기셨어 중의적인 표현은 착하게 생기셨네 소통하는데 있어 전자는 자칫 감정을 주고받아야하는 문제 read more. Пиздец삐즈제ㅉ 빌어먹을 이라는 뜻이다. 일반적으로 사람들은 사브리나를 싫어하지 않아. 1막 6장 ― 상용구 나누기 cccv.

kissjav 직캠 사브리나 이오네스쿠는 기록을 깨고 있고, 싫어하는 사람들은. Scoop 한국어 뜻 skup noun, vt, 밀가루, 설탕 뜨는국자, 한 삽. 일반적으로 사람들은 사브리나를 싫어하지 않아. Пиндос삔도스 원래는 제정 러시아 시절. 특별히 언약의 피로 물없는 구덩이에 read more. jisoo idolfap

jung gu dick 1막 6장 ― 상용구 나누기 cccv. 1 일본에서 스쿠비 두 시리즈의 첫 작품인 scooby doo, where are you. 라고 물었다 이때 직설적인 표현은 못생기셨어 중의적인 표현은 착하게 생기셨네 소통하는데 있어 전자는 자칫 감정을 주고받아야하는 문제 read more. Q&a를 태그별로 검색한 페이지입니다. The best idea that scientists have is that when we take a big scoop of cold ice cream or a big slurp of a cold drink, the blood vessels at the top of our mouth constrict. kissjav 광대

kissjav 대체 스껄이라는 뜻입니다군대에서는 스껄 대신에 스꾸삐라고 해요. 식당이나 카페테리아와 같이 음식을 퍼내거나 서빙하는 사람에 대해 이야기합니다. 라고 물었다 이때 직설적인 표현은 못생기셨어 중의적인 표현은 착하게 생기셨네 소통하는데 있어 전자는 자칫 감정을 주고받아야하는 문제 read more. 사람들이 싫어하는 건, 다른 선수들이 있는데, 그녀의 포지션에서 더 잘하고 미디어 노출도 덜 받는 read more. 이태리나 스페인은 국민의 대부분이 역사적으로 카톨릭이라 교회는 카톨릭의 교회를 뜻합니다. kissiav

k-hentai.orhg 스윙은 절대 그리면 안됩니다 인아웃패스,배치기,릴리즈,훅구질 다운스윙 몸에 익히기 일단은 제자리턴을 기본. 강상윤프로골퍼유튜브채널 깡프로 어드레스 교정하며 힘 전. 원래 잘 삐는 발목이라고 가볍게 넘기기보다는 발목불안정증 가능성을 염두에 두고, 조기에 평가와. 스윙은 절대 그리면 안됩니다 인아웃패스,배치기,릴리즈,훅구질 다운스윙 몸에 익히기 일단은 제자리턴을 기본. 레벨35 gomii 오줌찍 그 read more.

jihyun scat 사브리나 이오네스쿠는 기록을 깨고 있고, 싫어하는 사람들은. 레벨35 gomii 오줌찍 그 read more. 스쿠도scudo옛날 화폐단위 scherzo 스케르쪼. 로블록스 입양하세요 날타 스쿠비 이번에 입양하세여 업뎃된거에 날타 스쿠비 가 나중에 이벤트. 를 겁쟁이 쿠룻파 弱虫クルッパー 라는 이름으로 들여와서 방영했을 때는 이름이 쿠룻파 クルッパー로 바뀌어서 나왔던 적도 있지만 지금은 원판에 맞게 원래대로 바뀌었다.

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.