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.

인아웃, 쌍꺼풀 미리수 등을 직접적으로. 여자보단 사실 남자가 더 많이 쳐다보지. 보는 사람들 구역질 유발하니 좀 참도록 80 95 좀심함 노력암만해봐야 못생긴거에서 못벗어남 인터넷에 가끔 나타나는 외모열등감 덩어리 찌질이들이 보통 여기에 포진 98100 학창시절때부터 외모때문에 따돌림당해왔을 확률이 큼. 일반 한녀들은 남자외모 안보는거 맞긴함.

Kuzu V

Com › unse › saju신한라이프 sinbiun. 그에 걸맞게 이도현은 요즘 가장 핫한배우중 한명이다 3. 근데 남자들은 일단 외모가 예쁘면 장땡인 거다. Com › index여자들 남자 외모 안보는거 맞는데.

일반 한녀들은 남자외모 안보는거 맞긴함. 당연히 외모 보는데, 조금 덜 잘생기더라도 성격 좋은 사람이 좋다 2, 이쁜여자 좋아하는 건 나도 잘생긴 남자 좋아하니까 기본적으로 이해는 하는데 무조건 외모만 보고 이쁘냐 안 이쁘냐로 사람 판단하는 거 질리네요 이제살 쫙 빼고 풀셋해서 나가면 너무 이쁘다고 대시하다가살 찌거나 약간 관리 소홀해지면 마음까지 같이 식는, 무쌍ㅡ 장점 가장 동양적이라 이질감이 안듬,남자다운느낌 개성이강한느낌,요즘 추세에맞게 힙해보인다 단점잘생겼다는 느낌은 유속쌍에 비해 다소멀게느껴진다 답답해보인다,쉽게 질린다, 결혼적령기 되면 여자들이 남자 외모 안보는 이유 feat.

영어권에서 유래한 개념인 루키즘lookism의 번역어다. 26 저말이랑 키 큰 여자가 남자 키 안본다는 말이 제일 어이없긔 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ 안보는게 아니라 못보는 거쟈나요 한남들 대부분이 존만하니까. 중화권 한류의 시초격 그룹 중 하나가 클론이었다.

내 눈으로 여자 외모 중요하게 보는 부분을 말하자면 역시 골반하고 다리, 가슴같다, Net › name › 54230806남자는 능력이 중요함 외모보다 인스티즈 instiz 이성 사랑방 카. Net › name › 54230806남자는 능력이 중요함 외모보다 인스티즈 instiz 이성 사랑방 카.

Korean Bj 75dcup

남이 보는 내 얼굴을 정확하게 알기 어려워요.. 등 추상적으로 얼버무리면 원장은 대충 알아듣고 지가 하던 수술대로 해서 존트 느끼한 겉쌍이 나오게 된당.. 이런생각 들어 ㅋ̄̈ㅋ꙼̈ㅋ̆̎ㅋ̐̈ㅋ̊̈ㅋ̄̈ㅋ̄̈남친이랑 얘기하다가 자기 친누나가전여자친구들 보면 얼굴 안보냐고 하면서 헤어지라고 했대 장난반 진심반..

결혼적령기 되면 여자들이 남자 외모 안보는 이유 feat, 안그러고 대충 얇게 해주세요 속쌍되게 해주세요. 11 212730 삭제 레버리지_마스터, 근데 직접적으로 여자가 남자 외모칭찬을 하진 않음. 일단 여자는 혼자있을때 아무리 잘생겨도 힐끔거리나 단톡방에 존잘봤다고 카톡하지 정신병자 아닌이상 와존잘 이소리안함주로 친구나 여자 동성끼리있을때 잘생긴애 티존나냄 지들끼리 여중고생애들이 제일 티많이냄 1.

Korean Pantypoop

Kyonyuu Onna Shikan Sennou Saimin

15 215332 삭제 중국산오징어112, 하늘이 점지해준 내 운명의 배우자는 어떤 외모성격직업을 가지고 있는지 과연 미래의 배우자는 있는 것인지 평생의 배우자를 확인하실 수 있습니다, 여자가 이성으로 안보는 착한 남자들의 특징 ㅇㅇ185. 일반 한녀들은 남자외모 안보는거 맞긴함, 올리브영 알바 남자, 올리브영 알바 외모, 올리브영 알바 짤림, 올리브영 알바 무릎나가는지 등 자세한.

등 추상적으로 얼버무리면 원장은 대충 알아듣고 지가 하던 수술대로 해서 존트 느끼한 겉쌍이 나오게 된당, 일단 외모는 유전임 그냥 모든 사주는 가능성의 바운더리만 잡아줄뿐 사주에서 외모를 상으로 따도 유전자가 하면 중타가는거고 유전자 구려도 사주 잘받으면 조합 기가막히게 되는 경우가 있음 ㅇㅋ. 내 운명의 정해진 배우자는 있는것일까. 15 215332 삭제 중국산오징어112. 올리브영 알바 후기에 대해서 궁금해하시는 분들을 위해서. 하늘이 점지해준 내 운명의 배우자는 어떤 외모성격직업을 가지고 있는지 과연 미래의 배우자는 있는 것인지 평생의 배우자를 확인하실 수 있습니다.

korean shemale thisvid 한녀들은 남자외모 안보는거 맞긴함 국내지하아이돌 미니. Com › unse › saju신한라이프 sinbiun. 하지만 100번 찍어서 안넘어가는 나무 없다고 계속 시도하면 몇번은 걸리긴 함. 남이 보는 내 얼굴을 정확하게 알기 어려워요. 여자보단 사실 남자가 더 많이 쳐다보지. korean nooby kemono

korean rare cam Com › index여자들 남자 외모 안보는거 맞는데. Com › index여자들 남자 외모 안보는거 맞는데. 안그러고 대충 얇게 해주세요 속쌍되게 해주세요. 중화권 한류의 시초격 그룹 중 하나가 클론이었다. 후면카메라로 찍은 동영상으로 쉽게 확인해보세요 여러분은 read more. kuzu 59 sex

lck t1 갤 10 232001 조회 34817 추천 300 댓글 142 1 이미지 순서 on. 인아웃, 쌍꺼풀 미리수 등을 직접적으로. 그에 걸맞게 이도현은 요즘 가장 핫한배우중 한명이다 3. 하늘이 점지해준 내 운명의 배우자는 어떤 외모성격직업을 가지고 있는지 과연 미래의 배우자는 있는 것인지 평생의 배우자를 확인하실 수 있습니다. 이런생각 들어 ㅋ̄̈ㅋ꙼̈ㅋ̆̎ㅋ̐̈ㅋ̊̈ㅋ̄̈ㅋ̄̈남친이랑 얘기하다가 자기 친누나가전여자친구들 보면 얼굴 안보냐고 하면서 헤어지라고 했대 장난반 진심반. kurumi pikpak

lesson parade cg 본인 얼굴이 넘 별로라 여자 외모도 안따진다는 소리인가 아니면 정말 성격만 본다는 얘기인가못생긴 남자도 여자 외모 보지않아. 뭔가 나도 예쁘지 않은데 그냥 사귀는 건가. 등 추상적으로 얼버무리면 원장은 대충 알아듣고 지가 하던 수술대로 해서 존트 느끼한 겉쌍이 나오게 된당. 26 1950 성격을 보는건 팩트인데 얼굴도 좋으면 더 좋은거지 ㅋㅋㅋ 에일리홀릭 2020. 올리브영 알바 남자, 올리브영 알바 외모, 올리브영 알바 짤림, 올리브영 알바 무릎나가는지 등 자세한.

kuzu_v0 62 내 눈으로 여자 외모 중요하게 보는 부분을 말하자면 역시 골반하고 다리, 가슴같다. Com › unse › saju신한라이프 sinbiun. 남이 보는 내 얼굴을 정확하게 알기 어려워요. 내면의 아름다움을 본대요,후아, 모야. 일단 외모는 유전임 그냥 모든 사주는 가능성의 바운더리만 잡아줄뿐 사주에서 외모를 상으로 따도 유전자가 하면 중타가는거고 유전자 구려도 사주 잘받으면 조합 기가막히게 되는 경우가 있음 ㅇㅋ.

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.