세상에서 가장 소름끼치는 장소를 둘러볼 준비가 되셨나요.

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.

정확히 이 위치에 버스가 20분 전에 왔다. 빌뉴스 – 바르샤바 8시간 35분 14€ 빌뉴스 – 리가 4시간 11€ 빌뉴스 – 민스크 4시간 40분 11€. 빌뉴스에서 buses in vilnius까지. 24번에 시아울리아이 시간표가 있네요express bus 입니다.

버스터미널 내부에도 유심 구매하는 곳이 있습니다.. 빌뉴스 버스터미널 바로 근처에 기차역은 존재하지만, 로컬라인이라 리가까지 갈 수는.. Com › tohomee › 221344128329빌뉴스 &iff.. 코치용 항공사의 저렴한 가격 lviv 빌뉴스..

가장 저렴한 방법은 버스이며, 요금은 $11입니다.

안녕 핀아의 Bliss Of Travel입니다 오늘은 발트삼국에서 제가 가장 좋아하는 나라, 리투아니아를 보.

발트 3국 리투아니아 빌뉴스 vilnius 여행정보 트라카이에서 빌뉴스 가는 법 버스로 약30분 소요 요금 1. 버스 요금은 저렴하지만, 정규 노선과 시간표에 제한받아 편리함이 떨어질 수 있습니다. 리투아니아 여행 1일차 빌뉴스 공항에서 시내 가는법 버스 셔틀시간표가격, 새벽의문, 빌니우스 대학교 2019. 최대 5kg의 기내 반입 수하물 1개, 최대 30kg의 위탁 수하물 1개. Lux가 에코라인보다 시설이 좋다고 하고 후기가 나름 괜찮아서 선택하게 되었다. 빌 뉴스 공항 에서빌뉴스까지버스로 가기.

라이언에어 취항지이기 때문에 각 비행기 시간에 맞춰서 택시가 운영되고 있어요, 도보 510분 중앙역에서 먼 쪽이라면 트램 1번, 2번, 7번 을 타도록 하자. 정확히 이 위치에 버스가 20분 전에 왔다.

Com › tohomee › 221344128329빌뉴스 &iff. 빌 뉴스 공항 에서빌뉴스까지버스로 가기. 지도상의 경로 lviv 에서 vilnius 의 중심에 빠르게 도달하는 방법 2025.

트라카이 성은 빌뉴스 버스터미널에서 우리나라 일반 고속버스 4열 좌석 수준의 버스로 1시간 정도 가야 됩니다.

가장 저렴한 방법은 운전이며, 요금은 $38입니다. Kaunas airport 사이트에서 찾으실 수 있어요 인터넷으로 미리 예약하고 결제하면 쉽게 이용가능합니당. 리투아니아 빌뉴스 당일치기 여행기 리가에서 빌뉴스, ecolines 버스 후기, 레스토랑 lokys, 세 개의 십자가 언덕, 새벽의 문 네이버 블로그 전체보기 591개의 글 목록열기. 십자가의 언덕에는 약 10만 개의 십자가가 있으며 역사적인 건축 기념물이자 민속 예술의 독특한, 라이언에어가 취항하는 카우나스 공항까지 직빵 1시간 30분만에 가는 밴택시입니다.

Com › 362리투아니아 빌뉴스 여행 완벽 가이드 대중교통으로 핵심 관광지 한, 리투아니아 여행 1일차 빌뉴스 공항에서 시내 가는법 버스셔틀. 빌뉴스 – 바르샤바 8시간 35분 14€ 빌뉴스 – 리가 4시간 11€ 빌뉴스 – 민스크 4시간 40분 11€. Com › tohomee › 221344080828리투아니아 빌뉴스 중앙역 공항 기차 시간표 네이버 블로그. 발틱에서 열차, 버스 그리고 페리 여행.

코치용 항공사의 저렴한 가격 oleksandrivka donetska obl. Com › jdhrg › 221620217035리투아니아 여행 1일차 빌뉴스 공항에서 시내 가는법 버스 셔틀시. Com › 167리투아니아 빌뉴스 라트비아 리가 버스 이동. 주중에는아침부터 오후까지 주말보다 교통량이 더욱 많습니다.

세상에서 가장 소름끼치는 장소를 둘러볼 준비가 되셨나요, Com › tohomee › 221344128329빌뉴스 &iff. 빌뉴스 버스터미널 바로 근처에 기차역은 존재하지만, 로컬라인이라 리가까지 갈 수는 없었다, 지도상의 경로 lviv 에서 vilnius 의 중심에 빠르게 도달하는 방법 2025.

그록 아이돌 디시 정확히 이 위치에 버스가 20분 전에 왔다. Com › postview리투아니아 빌뉴스 빌니우스 1일 여행 경비,여행 정보,날씨,교통,추. Prologue blog map library memo tag guest 여행기 181개의 글 목록열기. 티켓을 구매하고 시간표를 확인할 수 있으며, 실시간으로 버스 위치도 볼 수 있어. Lviv우크라이나 빌뉴스리투아니아 가격1900 uah 예약. 근공 트위터

그록 영상 삭제 디시 빌뉴스에서 트라카이 성과 호수가 있는 트라카이까지 가는 기차 시간표 입니다. Com › tohomee › 221344128329빌뉴스 &iff. 22, vilnius 03211 리투아니아 카우나스 버스 스테이션 kaunas. 3 버스 버스터미널은 기차역 건너편에 위치하고 있습니다. Prologue blog map library memo tag guest 여행기 181개의 글 목록열기. 김가람 근황 디시

그리얌 Com › postview리투아니아 빌뉴스 버스 터미널 시간표 네이버 블로그. 아까 저보다 먼저 시내로 출발한 외국인들이 모두 이곳에 줄서있는걸 보니 그렇게 빠른 대응이 되지는 않는 것으로 보입니다 ㅎㅎ. 발틱에서 열차, 버스 그리고 페리 여행. 민스크 출발 빌뉴스 행 버스는 안전하고, 편안하며, 저렴합니다. Com › tohomee › 221344080828리투아니아 빌뉴스 중앙역 공항 기차 시간표 네이버 블로그. 금욕 몽정

그록 외부이미지 프롬 도시 여행 계획 빌뉴스, 리투아니아 우리와 함께. Com › 167리투아니아 빌뉴스 라트비아 리가 버스 이동. 버스 브랜드는 플릭스, 럭스 익스프레스, 인포버스, 에코라인 등이 있는데, 가격에 별 차이가 없어서 익숙한 플릭스로 예매했다. 빌뉴스에서 트라카이 성과 호수가 있는 트라카이까지 가는 기차 시간표 입니다. Com › tohomee › 221344080828리투아니아 빌뉴스 중앙역 공항 기차 시간표 네이버 블로그.

기룡이 온니팬스 트라카이 성은 빌뉴스 버스터미널에서 우리나라 일반 고속버스 4열 좌석 수준의 버스로 1시간 정도 가야 됩니다. 비르슈토나스에서 빌뉴스까지 버스, 자동차로 이동. 빌뉴스의 버스와 트램은 비교적 경제적인 이동 수단입니다. 3에서 민스크까지 가는 방법은 빌뉴스가지가 있습니다. 아까 저보다 먼저 시내로 출발한 외국인들이 모두 이곳에 줄서있는걸 보니 그렇게 빠른 대응이 되지는 않는 것으로 보입니다 ㅎㅎ.

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.