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.

Shift+enter 키를 동시에 누르면 줄바꿈이 됩니다. 저는 이때 배우님보고 와 진짜 잘생겼다. 배우 문상민 프로필 배우 문상민에 대해서 알아봅시다 배우 문상민의 출생은 2000년 4월 14일 충청북도 청주시에서 태어났습니다 현재 2024년 기준으로 나이 24세입니다 국적은 대한민국이며 본관은 남평 문 씨입니다. Com › entry › 문상민프로필문상민 프로필 과거얼굴 키 mbti.

오늘은 라이징 스타 배우 문상민에 대해 알아보도록 하겠습니다.. 문상민은 형 이도한을 향한 복잡한 마음과 나아정을 좋아하는 감정을..

유 히로 에겐 남

Com › 1955문상민 나이 프로필 키 과거 드라마 학력 소속사.. 그래도 사극에서 멋지게 나옴 얼굴이 작아서..

유이 하타노

그래도 사극에서 멋지게 나옴 얼굴이 작아서. 학력은 복대중학교, 한림연예예술고등학교 패션 모델과, 성균관대학교 예술대학 연기예술학이며 군대를, 일반 문상민 키만크고 얼굴 평범한데 이게 여돌폭격기임. 저는 남편의 사촌동생분께서 보호자를 해주셨어요, 문상민 씨는 섬세한 감정 표현의 연기력으로 작품의 몰입도를 높이는 배우로서 많은 팬들의 관심과 사랑을 받고 있습니다, ‘홍석천의 보석함’으로 첫 예능에 도전한 문상민은 사실 여기 나온다고.

12일 홍석천이 진행하는 웹 예능 ‘홍석천의 보석함 시즌2’에선 문상민이 게스트로 출연했다, 오늘의 1175번째 연예인은 배우 문상민이에요. 진짜 키도 엄청 크시고, 잘생겼다라고 생각했거든요, 배우 데뷔 드라마 은애하는 도적님아 이열 대군 남지현 케미까지 존재하지 않는 이미지입니다. 문상민 문상민키 문상민나이 문상민프로필 문상민배우 배우문상민 문상민아역 문상민이채민 문상민남지현 문상민슈룹 문상민홍은채 문상민뮤직뱅크 은애하는도적님아 남지현문상민 은애하는도적님아문상민 공감 0 인쇄.

유주하 인스 타 미공개 사진

문상민 키 엄청크다 기타 국내 드라마 갤러리. 2022년 tvn 드라마 슈룹에서 김혜수가 맡은 중전 화령의 둘째 아. Com › mgallery › board문상민 마이너 갤러리 커뮤니티 포털 디시인사이드, 문상민은 슈룹에서 성남대군 캐릭터로 급부상했다. 귀여운 외모와 다르게 키는 생각보다 커서 167168cm 정도 된다고 합니다. 문상민문상민의 본명은 문상민이며 2000년 4월 14일생으로 올해 나이 24세입니다.

유리조아 방귀 디시 190cm의 변우석에 대해 알아보세요. 배우 문상민 나이 키 남친짤 인스타 훈훈하네 네이버 블로그. 배우 문상민의 최근 근황 소식으로는 드라마 슈룹에서 성남대군 역을 맡았습니다. Com › 706문상민배우 프로필키, 나이 출연 드라마부터 과거 데뷔까지. 최근에는 드라마 에 출연하고 있는 인물로, 문상민 프로필은 다음과 같습니다. 유디 올노

위고비 마 운자 로 디시 배우 문상민의 최근 근황 소식으로는 드라마 슈룹에서 성남대군 역을 맡았습니다. 문상민 문상민의 본명은 문상민이며 2000년 4월 14일생으로 올해 나이 24세입니다. 문상민 비하인드 프로필 과거얼굴 키 mbti 슈룹 문상민의 비하인드 스틸이 공개됐다. Tv리포트이혜미 기자 배우 문상민이 고교 시절 교내에 팬클럽이 있었다며 청춘영화를 연상케 하는 학창시절을 소개했다. 문상민 쟤는 키가 191인데 한국 여자아이돌 마이너 갤러리. 윈터 노출

유두자위하는법 문상민 김도완 나이 키 인스타 사진 보기 네이버 블로그 연예인 596개의 글 목록닫기. 배우 문상민 프로필 배우 문상민에 대해서 알아봅시다 배우 문상민의 출생은 2000년 4월 14일 충청북도 청주시에서 태어났습니다 현재 2024년 기준으로 나이 24세입니다 국적은 대한민국이며 본관은 남평 문 씨입니다. Tvn 새 월화드라마 ‘웨딩 임파서블’극본 박슬기, 오혜원 연출 권영일 기획 스튜디오드래곤 제작 스튜디오329은 인생 첫 주연이 되기 위해 남사친과 위장결혼을 결심한 무명 배우 나아정전종서 분과 이 결혼을. 문상민 비하인드 프로필 과거얼굴 키 mbti 슈룹 문상민의 비하인드 스틸이 공개됐다. 문상민 쟤는 키가 191인데 한국 여자아이돌 마이너 갤러리. 월 달러

원피스 1100 방송인 장성규, 배우 서현과 함께 2024 kbs 연기대상 mc로 확정되며 그의 새로운 매력을 선보일 예정인데요. 문상민은 중학생 때 체육 선생님의 꿈을 가지고 있었지만, 선생님의 제안으로 모델을 꿈꾸게 되면서 처음엔 모델로 활동을 했었습니다. 그래도 사극에서 멋지게 나옴 얼굴이 작아서. 오늘도 평화로운 블라인드자기는 30 중반인데 20대 능력좋고 키크고 자상한 문상민은 사랑한다면 조건이나 나이 차이는 문제가 되지 않는다고 믿는 서주원을. 문상민은 형 이도한을 향한 복잡한 마음과 나아정을 좋아하는 감정을.

원피스 1144 애니 제 블로그는 gpt를 사용하지 않고, 순수 정보를 찾아다니며 작성한 글 입니다. 문상민 갤러리 설정 연관 갤러리 01 갤주소 복사 이용안내 배우 문상민 갤러리 매니저 문뭉 anstkdals0414 부매니저 없음 개설일 20221024. 배우 문상민 나이 키 남친짤 인스타 훈훈하네 네이버 블로그. 문상민 문상민의 본명은 문상민이며 2000년 4월 14일생으로 올해 나이 24세입니다. 아직 본인 나이도 어린 편이라 연상이랑 많이하는거 그래도 차기작 넷플드는 상대역이 1살연하 김민주임.

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.