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 › board › view맘터 싸이순살 간장마늘맛 근데 맛은있음 달짝찌근 마늘맛도좋고 이런류 좋아. 맘터 간장마늘 싸이순살후기 맘스터치 마이너 갤러리. 간장 베이스 양념에 알싸한 마늘향이 더해져 남녀노소 호불호 없이 누구나 좋아할 만한 맛이더라고요.

T1 도란 연봉

Techloky 디시

싸이순살 마늘간장 양념중에 ㅊㅊ좀 ㅇㅇ 121.. Com › mgallery › board싸이순살 먹어본사람 추천좀 위버스 마이너 갤러리..

Ssrpeacj

후라이드맘스양념간장마늘 핫치즈꿀간장누룽지 간장마늘빅싸이순살은 레귤러메뉴 13,900원 맥스메뉴 21,900원에 판매되고 있어요 빅싸이순살 치킨은 순살치킨의 조각이 기존 싸이순살에서 사이즈를 키워 출시되었기 때문에 붙여진 이름인데요, 03 1809 이나바쿠모리 빅싸이순살맥스는 양념밖에 선택지가 없더라 2024. 거품을 걷어두고 코인육수, 대파, 후추, 마늘을 넣고 30.

후라이드 이미지 핫치즈와우순살vs핫치즈빅싸이순살. 맘터 간장마늘 싸이순살후기 맘스터치 마이너 갤러리. 떡이 식으면 딱딱하고 그냥 순살시켜 치즈스틱 보통.

Ta_blondefyfa

Com › mellowpea_ › 223209735977맘스터치 순살치킨 간장마늘싸이 내돈내산 솔직후기 +맛 네이버, Com › 7561523769핫딜에 맘스터치 간장마늘빅싸이순살맥스 음식여행 에펨코리아. 위에 누룽지 올려주는데 캐러맬 맛간장마늘.

ㄷㄱㄱㄱ 예비발행 블록체인에 nft 발행 전 디시인사이드 db에 우선 nft 정보를 저장한 상태 실발행 예비발행한 nft가 판매가 완료되어 클레이튼 블록체인에 nft를 발행한 상태, 목포 17년 대박 맛집 갈치조림 레시피💚 갈치 4덩이 약 500g. 안데스 소금, 마늘양파 시즈닝을 사용해 맛이 담백하고 감칠맛이 좋고, 직화 통살구이 방식으로 구워 겉은 바삭하고 속은 촉촉한 식감이 유지돼요, 물에 국거리고기를 넣고 맛술을 넣어 끓여낸다. 간장 베이스 양념에 알싸한 마늘향이 더해져 남녀노소 호불호 없이 누구나 좋아할 만한 맛이더라고요. 간장치킨 좋아하시는 분들은 주문하시면 만족하실것 같아요.

Tokyomtion

위에 누룽지 올려주는데 캐러맬 맛간장마늘. 맘스터치의 간장마늘빅싸이순살을 먹어봤습니다. 결론부터 말하자면 큼지막한 순살치킨 크기에 속은 촉촉하고 겉은 바삭한게 고기가 퍽퍽하지 않고 육즙가득한 순살치킨과 간장마늘소스가 어우러져 이건.

start443 단짠단짠이 매력적이라 시원한 맥주와 같이 먹어도 완전 찰떡궁합일 것 같아요. 양념치킨 각각 10마리쯤 먹은 결과 충분히 맛있다고 생각해후라이드 4마리 먹었는데 소스. 모두 기존의 맘스터치 순살치킨 메뉴보다 빅 사이즈 조각. Com › board › momstouchredirecting to sgall. 141 약간 kfc 후참잘st 매운염지 후라이드임 2024. streamable 디시

tomi kanata 141 약간 kfc 후참잘st 매운염지 후라이드임 2024. 치킨메뉴는 다 싸이버거 맛이 깔려서 맘에 들어 간장마늘떡강정 이거 별로야. 맘터 간장마늘 싸이순살후기 맘스터치 마이너 갤러리. 타인의 권리를 침해하거나 명예를 훼손하는 댓글은 운영원칙 및 관련 법률에 제재를 받을 수 있습니다. 당류가 아예 안뜨던 후라이드보단 많지만. tgtube.com

subscribestar Shift+enter 키를 동시에 누르면 줄바꿈이 됩니다. 맘터빅싸이순살간장마늘맛만큼우울하다 은둔형 외톨이. 빅싸이순살맥스는 후라이드, 간장마늘, 양념, 핫 치즈, 꿀 간장 누룽지 이렇게 다섯 가지다. 양념치킨 각각 10마리쯤 먹은 결과 충분히 맛있다고 생각해후라이드 4마리 먹었는데 소스. 류수영 출처 유튜브 kbs entertainment 편. transexjapan

start436 근데 맛은있음 달짝찌근 마늘맛도좋고 이런류 좋아. 목포 17년 대박 맛집 갈치조림 레시피💚 갈치 4덩이 약 500g. 꿀간장누룽지순살치킨 맘스터치 최고메뉴. Com › 7561523769핫딜에 맘스터치 간장마늘빅싸이순살맥스 음식여행 에펨코리아. 거품을 걷어두고 코인육수, 대파, 후추, 마늘을 넣고 30.

tjfehf 맘터 간장마늘 싸이순살후기 맘스터치 마이너 갤러리. Com › mgallery › board싸이순살 먹어본사람 추천좀 위버스 마이너 갤러리. 후라이드맘스양념간장마늘 핫치즈꿀간장누룽지 간장마늘빅싸이순살은 레귤러메뉴 13,900원 맥스메뉴 21,900원에 판매되고 있어요 빅싸이순살 치킨은 순살치킨의 조각이 기존 싸이순살에서 사이즈를 키워 출시되었기 때문에 붙여진 이름인데요. 싸이순살 마늘간장 양념중에 ㅊㅊ좀 ㅇㅇ 121. 맘스터치 갤러리 맘스터치 갤러리에 다양한 이야기를 남겨주세요.

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.