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.

에반데 ebande definition of 에반데 의미가 너무 많아요 뭔가 조금 정도를 지나쳤다는 느낌이에요 상황에따라서는 좋은뜻으로 쓰일수도있어요 부정적으로쓰일때는 약간 무리이거나 과한요구를 받은느낌. 이거 하나 사자고 서울까지 가는건 에반데 ︎ 서울까지 가는건 에반데 어떻게 해석하면 돼요. What does 에반데 mean in korean. 에반데 （ebande） 에반데 の定義 英語を韓国のスタイルで使う言葉で over 오버 에바 になりました。 意味は 相手が 何かを おおげさに言う時に.

F95zone Yandere

Fc2ppv2843783

예반데 yebande definition of 예반데 예반데 is too much personally transformed word.. 4 20190602 013340 14..

Fc2 배우이름

에반데 ebande definición de 에반데 英語を韓国のスタイルで使う言葉で over 오버 에바 になりました。 意味は 相手が 何かを おおげさに言う時に 良く使います。 オーバーちょっと無理だなです。.. Items on hand 🇵🇭 and all 💯% authentic from 🇯🇵 pili pili lng.. 이름만 네이팜에서 따왔을 뿐, 실제 폭력과는 무관하며, 오히려 압도적이고 파워풀한 무대 퍼포먼스를 표현하는 유머러스한 은어로 자리잡았어요.. 예반데 yebande definition of 예반데 예반데 is too much personally transformed word..

Fc2ppv3259498mr

Question about korean. 특히, 참치라는 단어가 더해져 독특한 어감을 전달하며 주로 온라인 커뮤니티에서 자주 쓰입니다. A plasticwrapped item with japanese writing and colorful stickers, possibly a collectible figure two boxes of dragon ball z figurines on a read more, Com › questions › 25647125what is the meaning of 에반데개오바쌔바, 窓辺に 溶かずむのは 満月に踊らされ 마도베니 토카즈무노와 만게츠니 오도라사레 창가에 스며드는 보름달에 현혹되어 浮かんでは月のよう 姿を映す, It means it goes too far.

A japanese guy on a dating app said he is looking for scasy woman. What does 에반데 mean in korean. 제가 예민한건지 모르겠는데 이상하게 눈에 밟히네요, 에반데 ebande definition of 에반데 의미가 너무 많아요 뭔가 조금 정도를 지나쳤다는 느낌이에요 상황에따라서는 좋은뜻으로 쓰일수도있어요 부정적으로쓰일때는 약간 무리이거나 과한요구를 받은느낌.

거의 친구관계에서밖에 사용되지 않습니다. 개 에반데 에반데 에바무리한 일이거나 이치에 맞지 않거나 어이가 없거나 할때 쓰는 속어에요 理不尽な状況を言うときを表すスラング形容詞です 例. 에반데とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問. 에바とは、オーバーの韓国語ページ kpedia 「オーバー」は韓国語で「에바」です。, Com › questions › 15201633what is the meaning of 에반데. Com › questions › 15201633에반데은 는 무슨 뜻인가요.

Fc2ppv 4786734 アラサーになって焦って結婚をした事に後悔する豊満人妻。爆乳系グラビアアイドルとして過ごした華やかな日々とのギャップに耐えられず、刺激を求めて不倫sex [有]

즉, 에반데 는 영어의 evening 을 일본어로 번, It’s kind of meme, originally ‘에반데’ and means ‘too much’. 나 사회 문제를 해결하는 데 적합한 해결책이 아니라는 점을 강조하고 싶습니다.

fc2 ppv gif 방패 에반데とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問 hinative 最終更新日： 2021年9月16日 d64年9月15日 日本語 韓国語 韓国語 に関する質問. 지나간 23 de enero 2021. 작중 행적 편집 본성은 매우 착하지만 많이 어벙하고 1 어린 시절의 ptsd가 있어서 정신적으로 문제가 있던 청년이던 주인공이 여태 읽던 소설의 쓰레기 결말에 에반데 란 댓글을 썼다가 빙의당한 모습이다. 에반데 ebande에반데的意思英語を韓国のスタイルで使う言葉で over 오버 에바 になりました。 意味は 相手が 何かを おおげさに言う時に 良く使います。 オーバーちょっと無理だなです。. 개에반데 とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問. fansone hey_dian

fc2ppv-4802058 의미가 너무 많아요 뭔가 조금 정도를 지나쳤다는 느낌이에요 상황에따라서는 좋은뜻으로 쓰일수도있어요 부정적으로쓰일때는. 데對하야 滿洲國側에서는右 자 應員中 辭表를提出하는者 어디까지든지 全員一致 進退 種,懇篤한態度로써臨한 長官. 에반데 ebande에반데的意思英語を韓国のスタイルで使う言葉で over 오버 에바 になりました。 意味は 相手が 何かを おおげさに言う時に 良く使います。 オーバーちょっと無理だなです。. 에반데개오바쌔바是韩语中的一句口语表达，意思是太过分了或太夸张了。 这个短语通常用来描述某人或某事的行为或言论过于夸张或不合适。 例如，当某人说了一个非常夸张或不切实际的谎言时，你可以说：에반데개오바쌔바！. 방패 에반데とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問 hinative 最終更新日： 2021年9月16日 d64年9月15日 日本語 韓国語 韓国語 に関する質問. fc2 uniform

fc2ppv2751847 次にまたこんなことされると「困るわ」 「에반데. 거의 친구관계에서밖에 사용되지 않습니다. 지나간 25 de enero 2021. 에바참치 에바라는 단어에 재미를 더해 등장한 표현으로, 과도한 상황을 유머러스하게 비유한 말입니다. 제가 현직 초등학생에게 몇년전 직접들은바로는 에러+오바의 합성어라는 설을 들었습니다. fc2 ppv 4314697 0344

fc2 우는 그런데 우리 아이들 입에서 에바라는 말이 종종 나왔다. What is the meaning of 에반데. 거의 친구관계에서밖에 사용되지 않습니다. 에반데 ebande definición de 에반데 英語を韓国のスタイルで使う言葉で over 오버 에바 になりました。 意味は 相手が 何かを おおげさに言う時に 良く使います。 オーバーちょっと無理だなです。. 제레미 초심잃어버렷네 박호진 이수영ㅇ 버리냐 에반데 とはどういう意味ですか？ 韓国語に関する質問 hinative 最終更新日： 2021年8月6日 abcjebdbd 2021年8月6日 英語 アメリカ 韓国語 日本語 韓国語 に関する質問.

fc2-ppv-2754780 영어 표현과 관련된 유용한 정보를 제공합니다. 하지만, 이 단어는 일본어로 유래한 말입니다. 거의 친구관계에서밖에 사용되지 않습니다. 개 에반데 에반데 에바무리한 일이거나 이치에 맞지 않거나 어이가 없거나 할때 쓰는 속어에요 理不尽な状況を言うときを表すスラング形容詞です 例. Net › service › board킹받았다.

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.