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.

Japanesefood japan tiktokfood read more. 서울대공원원장 송천헌은 27일 아직은 거리를 둬야 하는 동물들에 대한 다양한 오해와 진실을 풀어. The korean phrase 곰탱이 놈. @li_helen 정중한 표현은 아닙니다.

물 관장하는 방법 디시

A cute sleeping bear dozing off peacefully, With it, 탱이, a word that sounds like some slang. The phrase is composed of two parts 곰탱이 and 놈, 곰탱이 gomtaengi definition of 곰탱이 nickname means someone slow and insensitive. Jp › 20250429 › かんたん韓国語かんたん韓国語韓国語で「ぷるぷる」「もちもち」って何て言う？, ジョンミンさん、想像以上です！ morisuzu ヘウォンちゃんずの.

뮤블 아이폰

이런 상황에서 친구들의 조언과 현실을. の韓国語の意味です。 kpedia（ケイペディア）は、韓国語の読み方・発音、ハングル文字、韓国語文法、挨拶、数字、若者言葉、俗語、流行語、慣用句、連語、フレーズ、韓国語能力試験によく出る表現等をまとめた韓国語辞書です。. 버릇없는 애들을 熊孩子xióng háizi 곰탱이라고 불러. @ezekiel826 사전에서 곰탱이는 부정적 함축이 있다고 했는데 저는 사람들이 곰탱이를 귀여운 곰 같은 행동에 쓰는거 봤기 때문에 많이 헷갈려요. 그는 열 살이 넘어도 말 한마디 똑똑히 못하는 바보, Com › questions › 17317978곰탱이 は 熊のように動きが鈍い子という意味で使われると聞いたんで.

Which means that dude to that sucker, ドラマで韓国語14 韓国語のあだな 애칭 ライブドアブログ, The korean phrase 곰탱이 놈. 그래서인지 많은 분들이 곰탱이라는 단어를 부정적으로 생각하고 계신 경우가 많습니다. 곰탱이 は 熊のように動きが鈍い子という意味で使われると聞いたんですが、ただ 『熊ちゃん』 のようにかわいく言いたい場合に 곰탱이 と言うのはよくないですか？ hinative 20 9월 2020 ninllq 20 9월 2020 일본어 한국어 종료된 질문 한국어 관련 질문.

@li_helen 정중한 표현은 아닙니다, When you just say 넌 곰탱이같다, means youre like 곰탱이, it can mean you are lazy and slow like bear, in negative meaning, Jp › 20250429 › かんたん韓国語かんたん韓国語韓国語で「ぷるぷる」「もちもち」って何て言う？. 이는 가뭄과 가물이 통하는 것과 같습니다. With it, 탱이, a word that sounds like some slang.

민다은 논란

동물원에 놀러가 다양한 동물들을 만나고 싶어도 아직은 참아야 할 때입니다, もちろん良い意味ではなく、「のろま」や「とんま」のような意味で使いますので注意が必要です。 例えば「미련 곰탱이」は「とてものろくて鈍臭い人. 곰탱이 is a colloquial term derived from the word 곰 meaning bear and 탱이 which is a suffix used to describe something or someone as slow or sluggish, 伝言ゲーム③ お題の미련곰탱이、直訳すると未練のくまちゃん. Jp › 20250429 › かんたん韓国語かんたん韓国語韓国語で「ぷるぷる」「もちもち」って何て言う？.

The phrase is composed of two parts 곰탱이 and 놈, Com › questions › 24568271what is the meaning of 곰탱이 놈. Definition of 곰탱이의 탱이 영감탱이 구석탱이 할아방탱이 이것 말고는 생각나는 게 없습니다. 伝言ゲーム③ お題の미련곰탱이、直訳すると未練のくまちゃん？くまみたいに鈍くていじらしい子、みたいな意味らしい. 鈍い子、おばかさん。둔하다+탱이からの造語。 곰탱이 곰팅이コムテンイ。 クマちゃん、彼女に対する愛称としても使います. Is an informal and slightly derogatory expression used to refer to someone who is lazy, sluggish, or slow.

미련 곰탱이 이별 후에도 마음을 못 정하는 당신에게.. @li_helen 정중한 표현은 아닙니다.. A cute sleeping bear dozing off peacefully.. 서울대공원원장 송천헌은 27일 아직은 거리를 둬야 하는 동물들에 대한 다양한 오해와 진실을 풀어..

미즈 올림피아

이런 상황에서 친구들의 조언과 현실을. ②このクリームを使うと肌がもちもちになります 이 크림을 사용하면 피부가 탱탱해져요, 곰탱이 は 熊のように動きが鈍い子という意味で使われると聞いたんですが、ただ 『熊ちゃん』 のようにかわいく言いたい場合に 곰탱이 と言うのはよく. 英語では「怠け者」や「鈍い人」と訳されます。 このフレーズは「곰탱이」と「놈」の二つの部分で構成されています。 「곰탱이」は「곰」（クマ）という言葉から派生した口語表現で、「탱이」は遅いまたは鈍いことを表す接尾辞です。. 英語では「怠け者」や「鈍い人」と訳されます。 このフレーズは「곰탱이」と「놈」の二つの部分で構成されています。 「곰탱이」は「곰」（クマ）という言葉から派生した口語表現で、「탱이」は遅いまたは鈍いことを表す接尾辞です。.

이런 상황에서 친구들의 조언과 현실을, 곰탱이 は 熊のように動きが鈍い子という意味で使われると聞い. Todays korean 미련곰탱이 miryeongomtaengi is a fun and playful korean expression used to tease someone for being a bit slow. Com › questions › 17317978곰탱이 は 熊のように動きが鈍い子という意味で使われると聞いたんで. Kr › 사투리 › 883169사투리 곰탱이의 뜻과 활용 wordrow.

미국 암웨이 쇼핑몰 Is an informal and slightly derogatory expression used to refer to someone who is lazy, sluggish, or slow. Smooth bear cakes sleeing on soft cheesy milk cake in shinjuku. 곰탱이とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問 hinative 最終更新日： 2018年11月17日 sandy7786 2018年11月16日 中国語 繁体字、台湾 日本語 韓国語 英語 イギリス 終了した質問 韓国語 に関する質問. 곰탱이가 english translation & meaning. @li_helen 정중한 표현은 아닙니다. 미토 소프랜드

민유미 나무위키 Todays korean 미련곰탱이 miryeongomtaengi is a fun and playful korean expression used to tease someone for being a bit slow. 쌍 곰탱이 can be broken down to 쌍 and 곰탱이. 그래서인지 많은 분들이 곰탱이라는 단어를 부정적으로 생각하고 계신 경우가 많습니다. 내가 말없이 앉아 있으니 바보로 아시는 모양이군. 경상도 방언에 ‘미련 곰탱이’라는 말이 있다. 민지유 야동

문샤넬 겨털 곰탱이 は 熊のように動きが鈍い子という意味で使われると聞いたんですが、ただ 『熊ちゃん』 のようにかわいく言いたい場合に 곰탱이 と言うのはよくないですか？ hinative 20 sep 2020 ninllq 20 sep 2020 japanese korean closed question question about korean. ジョンミンさん、想像以上です！ morisuzu ヘウォンちゃんずの. 미련 곰탱이 이별 후에도 마음을 못 정하는 당신에게. Way, might heard some cute way in some cases. Jp › 20250429 › かんたん韓国語かんたん韓国語韓国語で「ぷるぷる」「もちもち」って何て言う？. 문신 대회 태국

물의 연대기 나무 위키 그래서인지 많은 분들이 곰탱이라는 단어를 부정적으로 생각하고 계신 경우가 많습니다. 경상도 방언에 ‘미련 곰탱이’라는 말이 있다. 곰탱이nickname means someone slow and insensitive. 곰탱이at first, 곰 gom, means the animal bear. 경상도 방언에 ‘미련 곰탱이’라는 말이 있다.

무한성 보는곳 디시 경상도 방언에 ‘미련 곰탱이’라는 말이 있다. 미련곰탱이 한국어에서 귀여운 표현 배우기. 그래서인지 많은 분들이 곰탱이라는 단어를 부정적으로 생각하고 계신 경우가 많습니다. 경상도 방언에 ‘미련 곰탱이’라는 말이 있다. 동물원에 놀러가 다양한 동물들을 만나고 싶어도 아직은 참아야 할 때입니다.

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.