Federico Borello: International law is dead, but we must keep hope alive.

BarcelonaIn its latest report, Human Rights Watch issues an unprecedented warning: for the first time, the United States is considered a threat to human rights, on par with China and Russia. The organization paints a picture in which the disinterest of traditional powers and the rise of personalistic leadership have left civil society more vulnerable than ever. We discussed this and other findings of the report with Federico Borello, the organization's program director.

How do you explain this alliance between the United States, China, and Russia as a threat to human rights?

— It's not a traditional alliance, because the US, China, and Russia remain strategic competitors. What we're seeing is that Russia and China have spent decades undermining the rules-based international system, international law, and institutions. And the US, while imperfect and always applying double standards, broadly speaking, were the creators of the system and fostered it. Now, not only do they not support it, but they actively oppose it. The US, China, and Russia are allies in the sense that they share the same goal of undermining the international order.

We have also seen this erosion of order within the US: militarization of ICE, deployment of the National Guard, attacks on freedom of expression... Are we facing a structural change in American democracy?

— There is no doubt that US democracy is regressing. The data shows this very clearly: the United States is less free than it was just a year ago. All the indices confirm this. This does not mean that it is no longer a democracy. There is still opposition from civil society and the judicial system, as we have seen in Minneapolis. But there is no doubt that this administration is moving the US closer to an authoritarian system.

What are the consequences of the US distancing itself from global climate commitments?

— They are terrible. We know that the climate crisis is an existential crisis and, therefore, a human rights crisis for the entire world. The US administration is not only withdrawing from its commitments, but working against them by eliminating subsidies and favoring coal and oil. It feels like we've gone back 50 years. Obviously, when other major economies are making efforts to pressure countries like China and India to become greener, seeing the US backtracking doesn't help the cause and is therefore a threat to everyone's rights.

The US is also attacking the international justice system, especially the International Criminal Court (ICC). How can the system survive this?

— The US never ratified the ICC statute, but for years it supported it in cases such as Sudan, Libya, and Russia. But now it has sanctioned judges and prosecutors for doing their job: prosecuting international crimes. And this is, once again, a threat to the system. The ICC member states must rise to the occasion, especially the European Union, which has mechanisms to combat unjustified sanctions that are incompatible with its values. It is the only economic and political bloc that can counter the US's power against international justice.

Trump's style has spread to many countries, especially in Latin America, with leaders like Bukele and Milei, who disregard human rights. How do you see this? Trumpization in the region?

— Leaders who despise human rights feel emboldened by Trump's style. Bukele, in particular, boasted of transferring Venezuelans to high-security prisons, where they were mistreated and tortured, considering it a "service" rendered to Trump. The other danger for Latin America is the lack of respect for the law: attacks on vessels in the Caribbean and the Pacific have left more than 100 dead. Trump claims they were drug traffickers, but there is no evidence, and in any case, these would be extrajudicial killings. A president who decides he has the right to kill whomever he wants, anywhere, if he believes it is in the national interest is extremely dangerous for the continent.

They also mention the crises in Gaza and the West Bank. Are you worried about the plans of Trump and Netanyahu?

— We all want to see an end to the conflict. Since Human Rights Watch doesn't have an opinion on the peace plan, what matters to us are people's rights. Everyone who lives on this land—Jewish, Arab, Palestinian, or Christian—must have equal human rights in any solution. The question we ask is: how will this plan guarantee the rights of Palestinians? In the West Bank, for example, what we are witnessing is annexation. de factoThis has consequences for international law: the Israeli army has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide, with the full support of the United States and most European countries. This is devastating: how can I tell people in Africa or the Middle East that human rights are for everyone when they see this hypocrisy?

Do you think the same in the case of Sudan?

— Yes, Sudan's human rights record has been catastrophic. It's another example of a lack of interest and double standards. We've been asking for a UN mission to protect civilians for years, and no one has been interested. They don't want to put up the money, fine. But they could at least put pressure on their ally, the UAE, which openly supports the Rapid Support Forces. This shows the level of their lack of interest in Sudan. They're not willing to do anything.

Are we entering a new geopolitical era? The report highlights the role that "middle powers" should play from now on.

— There is no doubt about it. We have just returned from the Munich Security Conference, where all the world leaders were clearly committed to this. The old order is dead, but we must not despair. We must think creatively about the fact that we live in a new world order, with three more powerful countries: the US, China, and, to a lesser extent, Russia. The middle and smaller powers committed to a rules-based international order should form an alliance. An alliance to protect the ICC, the UN, international humanitarian law, to protect each other when they try to do the right thing and defend human rights. An alliance that counterbalances powers that adopt a negative and authoritarian vision of the world. And we are waiting for the EU to step forward and lead it, involving African, Latin American, and Asian partners.

One of the consequences of this geopolitical reconfiguration in Europe has been the rise of militarism. What do you think?

— It's always worrying that money spent on weapons isn't being spent on healthcare, education, or guaranteeing basic rights. We would all be much better off, but that's not possible. Likewise, it's not our mandate to tell governments that border Russia directly that they shouldn't spend on weapons. That's their national decision, which we must respect.

How does Human Rights Watch navigate in such a hostile environment for NGOs?

— Fortunately, HRW has never accepted a single euro or dollar from any government. Therefore, the US funding cuts haven't directly affected us, but they have affected many of our partners. In any case, this world is more hostile to civil society: ten years ago we had offices in Moscow, Hong Kong, India... and we've closed them all. We have to be careful. This government doesn't tolerate dissent or freedom of expression. But we are ready to defend ourselves. It is when rights are under attack that we must step forward. It's a dangerous time, but we mustn't give in to despair. It's time to organize. All is not lost, but we must recognize the challenges we face and keep our eyes wide open.