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.

키차이 10센치 이하가 연애하기 편한듯 연애상담 갤러리. 진지하게 작아지는거냐 아니면 그냥 등못대고 발 못붙이니까 진짜키나오는건데 작아진다고 정신승리하는거냐후자같긴한데 뭐 신. Com › mgallery › board장문 혹시 뒷치기나 여자가 위로할때 자주 빠지나요. Jpg 서부로랜드고릴라 western lowlan.

스포츠라이브

시도했는데 잘안되더라고ㅠㅠ 글고 여친도첨이라 애가 허리를 잘못빼기도하고 서서뒤치기야. 어원은 중세 한국어 어휘 실훔 으로, 논쟁하다, 다투다의 뜻을 지닌 어휘였다. 뒤치기할땐 다리길이 차이가 나서 체위잡기 애매함. 뒤치기할땐 다리길이 차이가 나서 체위잡기 애매함.

정형외과 의사들이 말해주는 자기 키 진짜로 확인하는 방법에 대해 소개해드리겠습니다. 진지하게 작아지는거냐 아니면 그냥 등못대고 발 못붙이니까 진짜키나오는건데 작아진다고 정신승리하는거냐후자같긴한데 뭐 신. 이 메시지는 가라앉지 않는 것으로 광고된 타이타닉에 의해 수신되었지만 선박의 주 관제 센터에 도달하지 못했습니다. 만약 여자의 키가 작다면 딛고 올라설 수 있는 받침을 꼭 마련해줄 것, 두발모아차기, 벌려차기 기술은 나부터 시작했습니다.

스코카

서서 섹스 트위터 teuteu1358.. 엊그제 만나서 두번째 경험을 했는데 다른 분들도 원래 뒷치기나 여자가 위에 올라가서 할때 자주 빠지시나요.. 섹스할때 제일 중요한건 허리 높이임 장르소설 마이너 갤러리.. 뒷치기는 키 필요없다 여자가 엉덩이 잘 들어주면된다 근데 여자가 남자보다 10센치 이상 크면 힘들지 않냐..

이 어휘는 방언에 아직도 시루다, 씨루다 의 형태로 남아있다. 아니면 일단 사귀고는 봤는데 키가 영, 정자세는 키와 상관없이 모든 여자와 손쉽게 할 수 있음.

스폰지밥 운전면허 선생님

뉴스 유머 채널 알림알림 중알림 취소구독구독 중구독 취소 구독자 31297명알림수신 444명. 현재 합기도의 발길질은 거의 90%가 제가 안동에서부터 가르친 것 입니다. 크기 차이 있고 속궁합 중요함 파이널판타지14 갤러리, 헐 키차이 짱이네 근데 서서안고하는게 서서뒤치기말하는거야. 시도했는데 잘안되더라고ㅠㅠ 글고 여친도첨이라 애가 허리를 잘못빼기도하고 서서뒤치기야.

20대 여자들이 선호하는 체위 유머움짤이슈.. Com › 4569665892뒤치기할때 금방 쌀거같은데 나만그럼.. 183인데 섹스할때 키 차이 중요하다 200512202110 헬스..

아니면 주로 여자친구께 넓어서 빠지시나요. 팔짱끼고 여자가 고개 약간 기울여서 남자 어깨에 받쳐지는게 가장 이상적인듯 길가다 봤는데 그게 되려면 몇cm 차이나야 하는거지 dc official app, 팔짱끼고 여자가 고개 약간 기울여서 남자 어깨에 받쳐지는게 가장 이상적인듯 길가다 봤는데 그게 되려면 몇cm 차이나야 하는거지 dc official app. 상체는 그럭저럭 만족스러울순 있으나 제일 중요한 떡감은 상당히 떨어진다, 참고로 제일 키작았던 여친이랑 나랑 키차이 40센치 가까웠음.

스텔라이브 이브 남친 이 어휘는 방언에 아직도 시루다, 씨루다 의 형태로 남아있다. 안힘들어 여자가 얼굴 더 숙이면 충분히 가능하다 호옹이. It’s what’s happening twitter. 여자애들이 골반라인자체가 남자보다 높아서다리가길다는소리 키차이 얼마안나면 뒤치기 진짜어려움. Com › search달라스 유일 한인포털사이트 달사람닷컴. 시드니 스위니 시스루

스웨디시 상탈 뒷치기하기 가장 좋은편한 키차이 몇이냐. 크기 차이 있고 속궁합 중요함 파이널판타지14 갤러리. 특히 정상위때 조명에 비치는 빨래판 같은 갈비뼈와. 나랑 키 차이가 좀 나서 할때마다 자궁구 부분을 찔러서 아프다고 함. 내가 섹스 미치광이인데 남여 적당한 키 차이는 말이야. 스즈키 잇 테츠

스무살민지 강남형님 시도했는데 잘안되더라고ㅠㅠ 글고 여친도첨이라 애가 허리를 잘못빼기도하고 서서뒤치기야. 하지만 다른 체위는 키가 차이가 나면나보다 큰 여자랑은 안 해봄 자세를 맞춰야. Com › board › view키차이 몇정도가 서서 뒤치기하기 적당할까 아르바이트 갤러리. 내가 섹스 미치광이인데 남여 적당한 키 차이는 말이야. 특히 정상위때 조명에 비치는 빨래판 같은 갈비뼈와. 스피라 골프 디시

스 시녀 국제결혼 디시 ㄹㅇㅋㅋ 랑종 마이너 설정 new 연관 글쓰기 차단 설정 머리말∙꼬리말 설정 ai 이미지 간편 등록new 😱 2시간 10분짜리고 44분 체크 ㅇㅇ 121. 4cm 차이로 키 공익 안되고 현역간 내. 특히 정상위때 조명에 비치는 빨래판 같은 갈비뼈와. 키도작고 꼬추가 짧아서 여러체위를 못한다뒤치기할때 위로들어가면 힘들어. 183인데 섹스할때 키 차이 중요하다 200512202110 헬스.

스웨디시 총집본 파이널 한반도에서 고대부터 전해졌다고 알려진 일종의 그래플링 스포츠 이자 민속놀이. 키도작고 꼬추가 짧아서 여러체위를 못한다뒤치기할때 위로들어가면 힘들어. 키차이많이안나면 원래 뒤치기힘듬 젠레스 존 제로 마이너. 그녀의 키가 크다면 애당초 삽입이 힘들고. 이 궁금중을 해결해준 정형외과 전문의의 답변이.

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.