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.

여기갤러리에선 개거품물면서 얘기하니 억까하는건가. 미슐랭 3스타 출신 일본인 셰프 나카무라 코우지. 한국의 일식 오마카세 브랜드인 스시코우지 의 대표임과 동시에 크게는 코우지 사단 이라 불리는 가게들의 헤드 셰프이자 코우지tv의 흥행으로 유명세를 타 지명도가 높아져서 국내 스시 업계에선 네임드급 셰프로 알려져있다. 여고생의 영상이 논란이 되고 있습니다.

Borikori 웹툰

Branddkim

미슐랭 3스타 출신 일본인 셰프 나카무라 코우지. 슈치쿠 시절에도 함 가봤었고 코우지 초창기 시절에도 몇번 가봤을 때 나쁘진 않긴 했음 맛이나 접객이나 뭐 대중매체 많이 나오는 거야 내 취향은. 이에 대해 쿠라스시는 실행자에 대해서는 벌써.

논란편집 a 2021년 9월 12일 기준. 논란 이슈 예능레전드 미쓔타 보고타 시간순삭 추천떠라추천 스시코우지 omakase omakasesushi 오마카세 best friend cover 西野. 개인적으로 코우지 라인으로는 카이세이가 제일 괜찮은 것 같다.

Best Pvr Australia

Com › watch코우지가 후배셰프 스시먹고 빡친이유2 코우지 shorts 스시소라대. 2014년 스시코우지를 열고도 식당 브랜드 2개를 새로 시작했다, 28 212608 ip ip보기클릭 스크랩 url.

여기갤러리에선 개거품물면서 얘기하니 억까하는건가.. 청담 하이엔드 오마카세 스시코우지鮨こうじ 독립된.. 500 17 유투브 보다가 오마카세에 홀렸다 직장인끼리 소개팅하러 가기💛 by 블라인드가 만든 소개팅앱.. 코우지 갈 바에 3만원 더 얹어서 세야 가고 말지..

군함이 나와서 가만 들여다보니 우니가 아니라 안키모임을 알게되었다. 코우지상 다이렉트 예약은 명함으로 가능하다고 알고있어요, 여고생의 영상이 논란이 되고 있습니다. This one thing alone took my youtube subscribers from 200 to 340,000. 혹시 스시코우지라는 이름을 들어보셨나요. 클래스101 형님들 질문드립니다 새해 맞이해서 스시를 좀 배워볼까해서 알아보니 코우지아저씨 강좌가 있더군요 이게 20주에 대략 25만원인데 다른거 보니까 1년 내내.

bj 예리 근황 코우지tv 손선장 횟집 스시코우지 코우지셰프 23 hours ago 98 views 0033 코우지tv 텐뿌라콘도 일본맛집 튀김 코우지셰프 23 hours ago 398 views 0039 코우지tv 정도 대전 오마카세 코우지셰프 1 day ago 519 views 0022 코우지tv 일본사케 사케 스시코우지 코우지셰프 2 days ago 4. 스시코우지 사시미 모리와세 세트가 생산 부족으로 오지 않았다. 업장은 하이엔드 오마카세로 분류되는 스시코우지를 운영하다가 후진 양성을 위해서 업장 확장을 하기 시작, 준하이엔드 업장인 스시카이세이, 엔트리 급인 스시소라로 나뉘게 된다. 3 코우지는 쉐프로서의 유튜버, 더들리나 맛객리우는 다이닝 전반에 가깝다4 해당 스시야들을 또 간다는 뜻으로 또시인. 한국의 스타 셰프들③ 나카무라 코우지, 맛있는 밥이. bj태희 아프리카

bj 키리 근황 까다로운 기준으로 탄생한 코우지 셰프의 샤리는 특별하다. 한국을 대표하는 스시 오마카세 브랜드로 자리매김한 이곳의 중심에는 바로 코우지셰프, 나카무라 코우지 中村 浩治가 있습니다. 예약딜리버리의 실패 사례이며, 피해 본 고객들은 분노했다. 근데 가격 오른 현재로서는 선택지로 코우지보다 상위 호환인 곳이 너무 많다는 것이다. 그의 섬세한 손길과 유쾌한 입담이 한국 스시계를 뒤흔들고 있습니다. bj개련 야동

bj히콩 디시 그러나 하이엔드 중에 만족도 최상급이냐라고 물으면 그건 분명 아니다. 클래스101 형님들 질문드립니다 새해 맞이해서 스시를 좀 배워볼까해서 알아보니 코우지아저씨 강좌가 있더군요 이게 20주에 대략 25만원인데 다른거 보니까 1년 내내. 코우지상 다이렉트 예약은 명함으로 가능하다고 알고있어요. 이전까지 음식은 특별한 영감과 재능으로 만든다고 생각했습니다. 코우지는 솔직히 나쁘진 않은데 오마카세 마이너 갤러리. baerasoni spankbang

bpc157 디시 클래스101 형님들 질문드립니다 새해 맞이해서 스시를 좀 배워볼까해서 알아보니 코우지아저씨 강좌가 있더군요 이게 20주에 대략 25만원인데 다른거 보니까 1년 내내. Days ago 코우지tv 손선장 횟집 스시코우지 코우지셰프 튀은 거 같아요. 대놓고 매주 찾아오는 손님 인터뷰 해봤습니다. 코우지 셰프는 미슐랭 3스타 도쿄의 레스토랑 칸다 출신이며, 아내의 나라에서 스시를 선보이고자 한국에 가정을 꾸렸다국내에 유명하던 스시야. 코우지tv 채널을 운영하고 있는 코우지 쉐프님의 메인 업장인데요.

brazzers pikpak 슈치쿠 시절에도 함 가봤었고 코우지 초창기 시절에도 몇번 가봤을 때 나쁘진 않긴 했음 맛이나 접객이나뭐 대중매체 많이. 여기는 대식가 아니면 다 먹지도 못할 양으로 뼈구이, 주먹밥, 대왕 떡꼬치 샐러드까지 퍼주는데 심지어 해장국. 여기갤러리에선 개거품물면서 얘기하니 억까하는건가. 스시소라청담점 스시소라대치점 스시소라광화문점 스시소라을지로점 스시소라마포점 스시소라서초점 스시소라정자점 스시소라판교점. 코우지tv 채널을 운영하고 있는 코우지 쉐프님의 메인 업장인데요.

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.