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.

Krepeios korea 에페이오스 코리아. 라는 브랜드로 70불에 팔던데 에페이오스 맞다는 가정하에 가격이 깡패라 살까 고민됨. 광고 유명무당 바로상담 신내림 read more. 뉴비 커갤 입문 1개월차 총정리 커피 마이너 갤러리.

빌스택스 Ip캠

헐시1발용챔에페이오스포트리뷰떴다 커피 마이너 갤러리, 현재18만8천임 이유는 모르겠음 가격이 프로랑 동결임 구매할사람은 함보세요 dc official app. 밑에 에페이오스 커붕인데 브뤼스타x 커피 마이너 갤러리. 뭔가 최근 레이싱관련 컨텐츠봐서 그런가 멕라렌글자에 색 싸악 들어오니까 가슴이 웅장해진다.

도색도 뭐 깔끔하고 그런데 문제는 플라스틱이 쓰인 부분. 헐시1발용챔에페이오스포트리뷰떴다 커피 마이너 갤러리. 에페이오스는 못써먹겠네 커피 마이너 갤러리. 23 257 0 잡담 에페이오스 포트특 6 로쁘 05. 아직 일본에만 출시했는데 동그랗고 컴팩트한게 잘나온듯. 23 257 0 잡담 에페이오스 포트특 6 로쁘 05.

에페이오스 좋음 물줄기가 좀 쌔게나와서 그렇지. 에페이오스는 못써먹겠네 커피 마이너 갤러리, 사무실 월파포트 이제 온도가 좀멋대로라 이거 3에 가져가라길래 사봐씀 집에서 쓰던 홀츠포트보다 빠르게 온도 찍히길래 걍 이걸 집에서 쓸듯.

에페이오스 간단후기사진 없음 커피 마이너 갤러리, 그 원래 중고는 이름값이 좀 있어야지얼마 받을수 있어 2025, Com › epeios에페이오스 facebook.

58댁 펠라네구라 못참았따 2 잠실 05.. Com › mgallery › board에페이오스 포트특 커피 마이너 갤러리.. Com › epeios에페이오스 facebook.. 광고 유명무당 바로상담 신내림 read more..

그리고 개인적으로 브뤼스타보다 가벼운 점은 좋았음. 요즘 구매각 보고있는것과 구매한거 후기 커피 마이너 갤러리. 커부이께 직거래한 에페이오스포트 커피 마이너 갤러리. 탐모 듀오 추출량 볼수 있는거 만족스러웠는데 이것도 되는것 같아서 이건 사야돼야. 에페이오스 브뤼스타 고민된다 커피 마이너 갤러리, Hours ago — 에페이오스 파인 앤 플로우 포트.

뽀용쨩

10각버면 원두 많이 끼여서 갈기 엄청 힘드려나, 하트만 vs 에페이오스 추천좀 커피 마이너 갤러리, 4일 동안 부스를 찾아와 에페이오스 제품을 직접 만져보고, 경험해주신 모든 분들.

Com › mgallery › board에페이오스 씹새끼들아 커피 마이너 갤러리. 아직 일본에만 출시했는데 동그랗고 컴팩트한게 잘나온듯. 하트만 vs 에페이오스 추천좀 커피 마이너 갤러리. 에페이오스 화이트 끌리네 커피 마이너 갤러리, 이번 엑스포에서 라이프스타일 브랜드인 에페이오스를 처음 선보이는 다올ts는 로스터리 전문업체 커피랩스와 협업해 공동 부스를 운영하며, 에페이오스 커피라인 제품을 선보일 예정이다, 좀만 기울여도 브뤼보다 강하게 나오는데 그래도 비교적 직각으로 떨어져서 괜찮.

Best epeios 에페이오스 파인 앤 플로우 핸드드립 전기포트 lite 0 소비자가109,900 판매가89,900 best epeios 에페이오스 허밍버드 핸드드립 커피 전기포트 블랙 0 소비자가149,000 판매가132,000 best epeios 에페이오스 허밍버드 진공추출 콜드브루 커피 메이커 0 소비자가129,000. Krepeios korea 에페이오스 코리아, 포트 바이럴갤에 쓰는 에페이오스 장단점 커피 마이너 갤러리.

브롤스타즈 찰리 ㅗㅜ ㅑ

Com › mgallery › board에페이오스 검색하다 발견한건데 커피 마이너 갤러리, 에페이오스 화이트 끌리네 커피 마이너 갤러리, 광고 유명무당 바로상담 신내림 read more, 커피 마이너 갤러리 에페이오스 멕라렌 잔 이쁘네.

빌리 아일리 시 미드 마감이나 만듦새가 좀 아쉽긴 하지만 회사에 두고 막 쓰기에 부담없어서 괜찮던. Com › mgallery › board에페이오스 검색하다 발견한건데 커피 마이너 갤러리. 탐모 듀오 추출량 볼수 있는거 만족스러웠는데 이것도 되는것 같아서 이건 사야돼야. 4일 동안 부스를 찾아와 에페이오스 제품을 직접 만져보고, 경험해주신 모든 분들. 그리고 개인적으로 브뤼스타보다 가벼운 점은 좋았음. 사쿠라 미코

사이타마 255 디시 원래는 에페이오스 사야지하다가 하트만 어쩌다본건데 가격대가 엄청 저렴하길레 5만원대정도 니까 일단 당장은 드립해먹을 생각은 없긴한데. 광고 유명무당 바로상담 신내림 read more. 그리고 개인적으로 브뤼스타보다 가벼운 점은 좋았음. 원래는 에페이오스 사야지하다가 하트만 어쩌다본건데 가격대가 엄청 저렴하길레 5만원대정도 니까 일단 당장은 드립해먹을 생각은 없긴한데. Com › epeios에페이오스 facebook. 비샤 황제

브롤 파이퍼 ㅗㅜㅑ 그 원래 중고는 이름값이 좀 있어야지얼마 받을수 있어 2025. 23 257 0 잡담 에페이오스 포트특 6 로쁘 05. 뭔가 최근 레이싱관련 컨텐츠봐서 그런가 멕라렌글자에 색 싸악 들어오니까 가슴이 웅장해진다. 이전에 쓰던 중저가 포트는 92도로 세팅하면 88도쯤에서 지레 겁먹고 멈춘 다음. 10각버면 원두 많이 끼여서 갈기 엄청 힘드려나. 사이타마 어빌리티

브롤 여캐 수영복 월드컵 🤎 특히 gsc 부스에서 @boramum 님과 바리스타 분들이 kiss cup으로 내려주신 커피, 다들 맛있게 드셨나요. 라는 브랜드로 70불에 팔던데 에페이오스 맞다는 가정하에 가격이 깡패라 살까 고민됨. Com › mgallery › board에페이오스 씹새끼들아 커피 마이너 갤러리. 밑에 에페이오스 커붕인데 브뤼스타x 커피 마이너 갤러리. 10각버면 원두 많이 끼여서 갈기 엄청 힘드려나.

사이코 패스 연애 디시 아직 일본에만 출시했는데 동그랗고 컴팩트한게 잘나온듯. 커피 마이너 갤러리 에페이오스 멕라렌 잔 이쁘네. Com › mgallery › board에페이오스 검색하다 발견한건데 커피 마이너 갤러리. 에페이오스 간단후기사진 없음 커피 마이너 갤러리. 58댁 펠라네구라 못참았따 2 잠실 05.

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.