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.

뎐 뜻 뎐은 한국어에서 이야기나 설화를 뜻하는 접미사입니다. 罔자는 网자와 같은 뜻으로 사용하는 별체 別體자이지만 단순히 ‘그물’이라는 뜻 외에도 ‘속이다’나 ‘ 사리에어둡다’, ‘근심하다’와 같이 그물에 걸려든 상황과 연관되는 뜻을 전달하기도 한다. Sns를 사용하다보면 유난히 유행어들을 많이 접하게 되는데. 얼굴이 빠았다 빻요미 등에 쓰이는 빻의 뜻 imgur.

귿으로 시작하는 단어 케이어스 디 블라드.. 뫄뫄 뜻, 정확한 의미와 사용방법 알아보기.. 귿으로 시작하는 단어 4개 귿곻, 귿내다, 귿업시, 귿없다 곻으로 끝나는 단어 3개 귿곻, 곻, 쥬복곻..

Pikpak ガチ

Worldwide since 1980. 현재는 쓰이지 않는 옛한글 자모 중 하나다. 휴지休止 앞에서는 ㅎ이 탈락하여 고로 나타난다. , 무엇이 갑자기 빠르게 열리거나 풀리는 모양. Org › wiki › 삵삵 위키낱말사전.

Pppp 노래방 번호 Tj

뫄뫄 뜻 인터넷에 뫄뫄 뜻을 검색해보면 유독 트위터에서 많이 쓰는 단어라고 설명이 된 웹 문서들을 볼 수 있습니다.. Com › postview뫄뫄 뜻, 정확한 의미와 사용방법 알아보기.. 이 문서는 parsoid 로 렌더링되었습니다..

Povkr-044

금박 金箔을 종이에 붙여서 가늘게 자른 평금사 平金絲, 예를 들면, 신기생뎐은 기생 관한 이야기를, 춘항뎐은 춘항에 관한 이야기를, 구미호뎐은 구미호에 관한 이야기. 근거로 지르코늄을 언젠가 귿곻이 가능했던 때가 잠깐 있었다, 그렇다면 화학원소로 쓰이는 단어들은 방어가 불가능한 것일까요.

pikpak りお 귿으로 시작해서 곻으로 끝나는 2글자 단어이다. 투자된 금액과 회수된 금액이 똔똔이 되는 지점이 1300만 명이라는 이야기다 법정 최저임금을 조금 넘는 수입으로 매달 방세와 식대, 교통비를 제하면 간신히 똔똔이다에서처럼 똔똔이란 말이 일상생활에서 흔히 쓰이고 있다. 황금색 黃金色 실을 섞어서 짠 바탕에 명주실 明紬로 봉황 鳳凰이나 꽃의 무늬를 놓은 비단 緋緞. 가령 디귿을 주면 다음 사람은 귿곻을 불러서 다다음 사람을 죽이거나 자신이 죽는 것밖에 선택지가 없다. 귿곻 뜻 오늘은 요즘 제가 데일리로 자주 사용하는 나이키 백팩 리뷰를 남겨요. redsun1106 nude

redlight 작가 대한민국 에서는 삵과 살쾡이를 모두 표준어 로 인정하고 있다. 휴지休止 앞에서는 ㅎ이 탈락하여 고로 나타난다. 성유물 합성 효율 주택,주거공간 상가,상업공간 공공시설 의료,교육시설 종교집회시설 디자인제안 인테리어,건축. 그래서 본래 ‘잇다’라는 뜻은 㡭자가 먼저 쓰였었다. 곬 물고기 떼가 늘 몰려다니는 일정한 길. pikpak 여친

pikpak secret japan 績자는 ‘길쌈하다’나 ‘깁다’, ‘삼다’라는 뜻을 가진 글자이다. 근거로 지르코늄을 언젠가 귿곻이 가능했던 때가 잠깐 있었다. 휴지休止 앞에서는 ㅎ이 탈락하여 고로. 이 문서는 2024년 7월 12일 금 1742에 마지막으로 편집되었습니다. Com › postview뫄뫄 뜻, 정확한 의미와 사용방법 알아보기. redgifs.cim

povkr-101 삵 학명 prionailurus bengalensis 프리오나일루루스 벵갈렌시스 또는 살쾡이 는 식육목 고양이과 에 속하는 동물이다. 금박 金箔을 종이에 붙여서 가늘게 자른 평금사 平金絲. 끝말잇기 할때 자음 이름에서 지읒,치읓,키읔,티읕,피읖,히읗은 다 자음공격으로 한방단어 인데. 繼자는 ‘잇다’나 ‘이어나가다’, ‘계속하다’라는 뜻을 가진 글자이다. 예를 들면, 신기생뎐은 기생 관한 이야기를, 춘항뎐은 춘항에 관한 이야기를, 구미호뎐은 구미호에 관한 이야기.

ppuengppueng3 이 때 디가 나왔을 때 디귿을 쓰면 안 되는데, 한방단어인 귿곻으로 이어지기. 그렇다면 화학원소로 쓰이는 단어들은 방어가 불가능한 것일까요. 삵 학명 prionailurus bengalensis 프리오나일루루스 벵갈렌시스 또는 살쾡이 는 식육목 고양이과 에 속하는 동물이다. 왜냐하면, 享자는 조상의 위패나 비석을 모셔놓는 사당을 그린 것이기 때문이다. 罔자는 网자와 같은 뜻으로 사용하는 별체 別體자이지만 단순히 ‘그물’이라는 뜻 외에도 ‘속이다’나 ‘ 사리에어둡다’, ‘근심하다’와 같이 그물에 걸려든 상황과 연관되는 뜻을 전달하기도 한다.

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.