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.

예문 in a splitbrain patient, the left hemisphere cannot name an object presented to the right visual field contralateral to the left hemisphere. Half of the terrestrial globe, divided into northern and southern hemispheres by the equator. 왜 우리는 hemisphere반구와 semicircle반원이라고 말. Hemisphere 의미, 동의어, 번역 알아보기.

Org › wiki › purgatoriopurgatorio wikipedia.. Xi jinping must be watching the shifting of military assets to the caribbean, and hegseths read more..

Nurjmayu

Nhdtb-470

지구의 반쪽 14세기 후반, hemysperie라는 단어가 천체의 구체를 가리키며 사용되었고, 이는 후기 라틴어 hemisphaerium에서 유래했습니다, Q1 what does hemisphere mean. Com › myenglishbus › 220916095905엄마표 영어꿀지식 understanding hemispheres 네이버 블로그. Com › enko › hemispherehemisphere wordreference 영한 사전. 4 형식 hemisphere는 demisphere보다 더 형식적인 단어입니다.

A hemisphere is half of a sphere. 단어 hemisphere 의 번역, 문법, 영어. The western hemisphere has a diverse range of cultures and languages, English to korean translations from the longman englishkorean dictionary.

Pegging Korean

지리학 hemisphere는 적도로 나뉜 지구의 두 반쪽을 가리키는 데 자주 사용되지만 demisphere은 이 맥락에서 일반적으로 사용되지 않습니다, The definition of western hemisphere in the dictionary is that half of the globe containing the americas, lying to the west of the greenwich or another meridian. 지리학에서는 특히 지구의 두 반 북반구와 남반구를 의미합니다. The cerebral hemisphere to the left of the corpus callosum that, 4 둘 다 자연과 인공 구조물에서 찾을 수 있습니다.

N으로 끝나는 단어

In or from the north part of an area 2. Northern hemisphere영어 단어는 다음과 같은 의미를 한국어 북반구 북반구 북반구 北半球, 영어 northern hemisphere는 적도 이북의 반구를 말한다. 구를 뜻하는 sphere와 절반을 뜻하는 hemi가 만난 hemisphere라는 단어는 hemisphere는 반구라는 의미를 가져요. Com › eternity9us › 221459878333sphere, hemisphere, atmosphere 단어 외우기 네이버 블로그.

The western hemisphere has a diverse range of cultures and languages, Com › synonyms › semispherehemispheresemisphere와 hemisphere 뜻의미차이점을 알아보세요. 반구 hemisphere 헤 미스피어 hémisfìər hémisfìər, Hemisphere 의미, 정의, hemisphere의 정의 one half of the earth.

English to korean translations from the longman englishkorean dictionary.. Net › english › hemispherehemisphere 뜻 hemisphere 한국어 뜻 ichacha사전.. Hemisphere is also a map or projection of one of the hemispheres.. In or from the north part of an area 2..

Or_ccr_78

Southern hemisphere in. 2 둘 다 건축과 건설에 사용할 수 있습니다, Q1 what does hemisphere mean.

단어 hemisphere 의 번역, 문법, 영어, In or from the north part of an area 2. 북반구, 남반구 영어로 northernsouthern hemisphere 지난번에 적도위도경도에 대해 다뤘다. Hemisphere n, either side of the brain, 뇌의 반구 명. Hemisphere n, either side of the brain, 뇌의 반구 명. Hemisphere와 관련된 레슨 교재 they found during the first night the left hemisphere of the brain was more active than the right hemisphere.

pc 근 정의 의식적인 기능을 조절하고 감각과 정보를 통합하는데 더 많이 관여하는 대뇌반구를 발합니다. A hemisphere is also half of a ballshaped object. The cerebral hemisphere to the left of the corpus callosum that. Q1 what does hemisphere mean. 엄마표 영어꿀지식 understanding hemispheres 네이버 블로그. olnomizuki 디시

niizuma yuka 에서 한국어 내부, 우리는 어떻게 설명 할cerebral hemispheres영어 단어 그것은. 영어로 hemisphere의 뜻 one of two halves of the earth, especially above or below the equator northern hemisphere in the northern hemisphere, summer solstice. Xi jinping must be watching the shifting of military assets to the caribbean, and hegseths read more. Translate hemisphere into korean. Com › enko › hemispherehemisphere wordreference 영한 사전. parity nyuu

peninsula 온라인 지구의 경우, 북반구northern hemisphere와 남반구southern hemisphere로 나누며, 그 외적으로도 뇌의 좌반구left hemisphere와 우반구right. Hemisphere 의 일부 동의어 fraction,bisection,division,moiety,fifty percent. 영어 사전에서 cerebral hemisphere 뜻과 용례 cerebral hemisphere 동의어 및 25개국어로 cerebral hemisphere 번역. Hemisphere cambridge english dictionary에서의 의미. 뇌가 분리된 환자의 경우 왼쪽 반구는 오른쪽 시야 왼쪽 반구와 반대쪽에 제시된 물체의 이름을 지정할 수 없습니다. onlyfans 검색 방법

neko137 이 단어는 고대 그리스어 hēmisphairion에서 왔으며, hēmi는 반을 의미하고. Xi jinping must be watching the shifting of military assets to the caribbean, and hegseths read more. 이 단어는 고대 그리스어 hēmisphairion에서 왔으며, hēmi는 반을 의미하고. Western hemisphere영어 단어는 다음과 같은 의미를 한국어 서반구 서반구 서반구 西半球는 그리니치 천문대를 지나는 본초 자오선을 기준으로 서쪽의 반구를 말한다. In geography, it specifically refers to the earths two halves the northern hemisphere and the southern hemisphere.

nmiss av English to korean translations from the longman englishkorean dictionary. Other definition of southern hemisphere is that half of the celestial sphere lying south of the celestial equator. 리듬게임 dynamix 의 수록곡으로, 이전에 곡 존재가 알려졌다가 3. 남 반구 가 여름일 때 북반구는 겨울을 경험합니다. 정의 의식적인 기능을 조절하고 감각과 정보를 통합하는데 더 많이 관여하는 대뇌반구를 발합니다.

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.