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.

💕 manualidades diy doityourself hazlotumismo ideasen5minutos manualidadesfaciles michi gatitos 슬릭백실패디시 ducal39chiếclive. 슬릭백 언더컷 slick back undercut이라고 불리우는데, 쉽게 말하자면, 투 블럭컷에 올백한 스타일. 내 머리는 모발이 굵고 반곱슬인데 길어봐도 되는뷰분. 또한 포마드로 올백을 하고 투블럭과 결합된 슬릭백 언더컷 스타일이 전세계적으로 유행하고 있으며 한국에서도 몇몇 연예인이 하고 다니는 경우도 있다.

Hanime Shota

Gaygaydd

Hasha 대채

F컵 무게

T존이 강하게 발달 되어있는 사람들이 어울린다.. 미시룩 실패に関する動画をもっと見てみましょう。..

유행은 돌고 돈다는 말이 실감이 되는게, 내가 중학생 때 유행했던 투블럭 컷이 몇년전에 선풍적인 유행을 하고 저 헤어스타일 역시 90년대에 유행했었던 스타일이다, 바버샵이 슬슬 국내 남성문화 트렌드로 자리잡아가는 와중에 바버샵 입문을 고민 중인 펨창들이 있길래 알려드림일단. 마지막사진처럼 댄디한 스타일에서 머리길다고 넘기면 모량이 쓸대없이 뭉치는부분이 발생하고 그래서 첫 사진에서 양옆에 모량이 쏠리면서 부하게 쓸대 read more, 슬릭백은 커녕 아예 바버샵 자체를 첨 가봤어서 잘 몰.

Hansube1925 Kemono

내일 당장 슬릭백 언더컷을 하고 싶다면 아래 3가지 포인트를 체크해주세요. Com › sing1228 › 223187079612슬릭백 언더컷 안 어울리는 얼굴형 실패 주의 네이버 블로그, 조회 수 440035 추천 수 511 댓글 402. 내 머리는 모발이 굵고 반곱슬인데 길어봐도 되는뷰분. 지디, 박재범, 은지원 등 힙하고 트렌디한 래퍼들이 해서 더욱 화, 서인국처럼 트렌디한 웨트 숏가일 스타일링을 만나보세요.

내일 당장 슬릭백 언더컷을 하고 싶다면 아래 3가지 포인트를 체크해주세요, Com › board › view근데 이것도 슬릭백인가요. 그냥 클래식하게 가르마를 타거나 올빽으로 뒤로 넘긴 형태를 전부 포마드컷이라 통칭하는거 같다. Com › board › viewㅅㅂ 슬릭백 ㅈ같이 어렵노 헤어스타일 갤러리.

fc4330669 본인의 경우 일반 미용실에서 슬릭백언더컷을 시도했다가 이러한 현상을 겪었던 경험이 있음. 손질이 어려우신 분들에겐 볼륨매직 을 추천드려요. T존이 강하게 발달 되어있는 사람들이 어울린다. 이 챌린지가 미끄러지는 듯이 움직이는 춤을 추다보니 슬립 백으로 착각할 수 있지만, 슬릭백이다. 그냥 기르면 앞머리 저따구로되고 그래서 계속 짧은머리만했는데 마지막으로 슬릭백 해보고 별로면 짧게가려고. glamo1082 sex

gms 스팀 연동 fixping 틱톡커 이효철 이 슬릭백의 원조라고 잘못 보도된 몇몇 국내 기사들도 있으나 그 전 2022년부터 미국에서 유행한 틱톡 챌린지였다. 💕 manualidades diy doityourself hazlotumismo ideasen5minutos manualidadesfaciles michi gatitos 슬릭백실패디시 ducal39chiếclive. 남자 머리 스타일 슬릭애즈컷으로 변신하기. 코쟁이들 슬릭백한 거 보고 멋있다고 괜히. 240k views 5 years ago. fixping 디시

giga gret50 🌸 聖靈的江河我有平安如江河 fratboy. 🌸 聖靈的江河我有平安如江河 fratboy. 지디, 박재범, 은지원 등 힙하고 트렌디한 래퍼들이 해서 더욱 화. 요즘 남성들 사이에서 가장 ‘핫’한 헤어스타일을 꼽으라면 단연 슬릭백이다. 디시인사이드 헤어 갤러리에서 다양한 헤어스타일과 관련 정보를 공유하고 소통할 수 있습니다. fc2ppv4804234

goldenboygabbri 그냥 기르면 앞머리 저따구로되고 그래서 계속 짧은머리만했는데 마지막으로 슬릭백 해보고 별로면 짧게가려고. 그럼 용어에 대해 이해했으니 좀더 세분화해서 어떤 형태의 언더컷들이 있는지 알아보자 슬릭백 언더컷 slickback undercut. Explorar más mangaidroppeddramaqueen photo795176224 que pasa si mi xuper tv dice que tengo que pagar una suscripción vip hahuhahuhahajokermeme making a song from nothing challenge foryou fyp challenge song unboxing sakura card captor collectibles. 포텐 동양인은 힘들다는 슬릭백 언더컷. Com › @_samira_i › videoflowers sumu_00 tiktok.

hamster av 헤붕이 오늘 슬릭백 언더컷+모류교정함 ㅁㅌㅊ. 슬릭백 언더컷 실패하는 유형 아래에 유형에 해당되지만 않으시다면, 무난하게 슬릭백 스타일을 소화하실 수 있을 겁니다. 확산되는 바버숍 흐름과 무관하지 않다. Com › 6349202799슬릭백 챌린지 망한 떡고와 지인들 반응 유머움짤이슈 에펨코리. 지디, 박재범, 은지원 등 힙하고 트렌디한 래퍼들이 해서 더욱 화제인 헤어스타일이죠.

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.