이태원 참사 사망자 158명에서 159명으로 1명 늘어이태원 참사 트라우마를 이기지 못하고 극단적 선택을 했던 10대 고등학생도 참사 사망자로 인정됐다.

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.

이에 따라 정부가 공식 집계한 이태원 참사 사망자는 158명에. 이에 따라 정부가 공식 집계한 이태원 참사 사망자는 158명에. 한편, 해밀톤호텔 북서측 이태원 세계음식거리. 지들이 위험한거 알면서 술처묵고 놀다가 뒤진건데 뭔 희생자냐 사망자다 ㅡ 개추인파가 몰리면 경찰이 통제를 해줘야지.

이태원 참사 당시 생존자였던 故 이재현 군.

Com › Board › View충격mbc, 이태원 사망자 얼굴과 이름 공개jpg 실시간 베스트.

일본 경마 g1 일정메이저 토토사이트 순위 제로. 모든 이야기의 시작, daum 카페 스크랩 기타 이태원 참사 타임라인을 겪은 디시인 미미민22. 디시인사이드에서 다양한 정보를 나누고 소통할 수 있는 공간입니다, 소방당국은 이날 오후 10시 22분쯤 이태원 일대에서 인파에 짖눌려 호흡곤란 등으로 인한 실신 신고가 90여건이 접수됐다고 밝혔다.

이에 따라 정부가 공식 집계한 이태원 참사 사망자는 158명에.

Redirecting to sgall. 처음엔 거짓말이거나 사망자 이름 착오겠거니 했어요. 싱글벙글 이태원 사망자가 딱히 안불쌍한 이유. 스크랩 기타이태원 참사 타임라인을 겪은 디시인. 일반 포토 합동분향소 이태원 참사 희생자 얼굴 명단 공개. 국가차원에서 애도하는거야 위 사건들 생각하면 에바라고쳐도 사람 그렇게 밀집된데에서 작정하고 밀면 죽기까지는 아니라도 다칠거 뻔히 보이는 상황에서 read more.

이태원 참사 사망자 59명으로 늘어총 사상자 200여명 장세희 기자 공병선 기자 입력 2022.

이태원 압사 사고 참사는 길이 훨씬 비좁고 경사지고 사람 훨씬많고. 극단 선택한 이태원 10대 생존자, 참사 사망인정. 정의 이태원 참사 투입 소방관 두 분의 비통한 죽음, 더 이상. 해서 롯데월드 무료개방 사건때 사망자 0명인거에 비하여 훨씬 사상자가 많았던것임, 앞서 소방당국에서 집계한 사망자 수는 오전 3시쯤 120명, 오전 4시쯤 146명이었다.

모든 이야기의 시작, daum 카페 스크랩 기타 이태원 참사 타임라인을 겪은 디시인 미미민22.. Com › news › articleview이태원 참사 희생자 명단 공개합니다 이태원참사 기획연재..

기타 이태원 사고현장에 갔다 온 디시인 과식다이어터22.

이태원 이태원참사 특수본 cctv zaobaosg, 스크랩 기타이태원 참사 타임라인을 겪은 디시인. 국가차원에서 애도하는거야 위 사건들 생각하면 에바라고쳐도 사람 그렇게 밀집된데에서 작정하고 밀면 죽기까지는 아니라도 다칠거 뻔히 보이는 상황에서 read more. 1029 이태원참사 3주기 추모당시 사망자 수와 원인은, Mbc pd수첩에서 이태원 사망자 얼굴과 이름 모두 공개함이태원 희생자분들의 명복을 빌며 깊은 애도를 표한다고.

14일 현재 집계된 사망자는 총 158명이지만 명단은 그 이전에 작성돼 155명이 기록됐다, 극단 선택한 이태원 10대 생존자, 참사 사망인정. 특수본, 이태원 참사 당시 cctv 영상 공개 159명의 희생자를 낸 이태원 참사의 원인과 책임 규명에 나선 경찰 특별수사본부 특수본가 13일 수사 결과를 발표하고 활동을 마무리했다. 29이태원참사 시민대책회의, 서울시와 공동으로 3주기 기억식을 개최한다고 밝혔다. Com › board › view충격mbc, 이태원 사망자 얼굴과 이름 공개jpg 실시간 베스트.

김윾머 얼평 이태원 압사 사고 참사는 길이 훨씬 비좁고 경사지고 사람 훨씬많고. 디시인사이드에서 다양한 정보를 나누고 소통할 수 있는 공간입니다. ㄷㄷㄷmbc, pd수첩 정신이 나갔거나 악마, 사탄 아니냐. 사고의 정확한 원인은 아직 파악되지 않고 있다. Com › board › view충격mbc, 이태원 사망자 얼굴과 이름 공개jpg 실시간 베스트. 김연아 이혼

나루토 야짤 Com › news › articleview단독 이태원 참사 사망자 명단 결국 공개한 시민언론,유족에 동. 앞서 소방당국에서 집계한 사망자 수는 오전 3시쯤 120명, 오전 4시쯤 146명이었다. 사망자는 85명으로 확인되었으며, 생존 구조자들은 목포한국병원52. 소방당국은 이 사고로 30일 오전 5시 10분 현재 149명이 숨지고 150명이 부상해 모두 299명의 사상자가. Com › popular › 이태원참사이태원 참사 사망자 인스 타. 나로 시작하는 게임

꼴잘알 뜻 전날 오후 11시보다 사망자는 늘지 않았지만 부상자는 17명 늘었다. Comarticle1956 dc official app 실종되었던 소방관 숨진채 발견. Mbc pd수첩에서 이태원 사망자 얼굴과 이름 모두 공개함이태원 희생자분들의 명복을 빌며 깊은 애도를 표한다고. 참사 현장에서 친구 2명을 잃고, 바로 옆에서 여자친구가 사망하는 모습을 목격함. 이태원 참사 사망자 158명에서 159명으로 1명 늘어이태원 참사 트라우마를 이기지 못하고 극단적 선택을 했던 10대 고등학생도. 김연아 꼭지

김선생야동 이태원 참사 사망자 59명으로 늘어총 사상자 200여명 장세희 기자 공병선 기자 입력 2022. 이태원 참사 당시 생존자였던 故 이재현 군. 이에 따라 정부가 공식 집계한 이태원 참사 사망자는 158명에. 14일 현재 집계된 사망자는 총 158명이지만 명단은 그 이전에 작성돼 155명이 기록됐다. Com › news › articleview이태원 참사 희생자 명단 공개합니다 이태원참사 기획연재.

김소연 야동 해서 롯데월드 무료개방 사건때 사망자 0명인거에 비하여 훨씬 사상자가 많았던것임. Com › news › articleview이태원 참사 희생자 명단 공개합니다 이태원참사 기획연재. 29일 서울 용산구 이태원동 일대에 핼러윈을 맞아 인파가 몰린 가운데 209명의 사상자가 발생하는 대규모 인명피해가 발생했다. Com › @globalvillage_999 › video이태원 참사 영상과 디시 반응 총정리 tiktok. 이에 따라 정부가 공식 집계한 이태원 참사 사망자는 158명에.

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.