The United States government has issued new directives through the State Department that classify countries enforcing diversity, equity, and inclusion policies as infringing on human rights, marking a significant shift in American foreign policy. This move, reported today, expands the Trump administration’s domestic agenda internationally and has drawn sharp criticism from human rights advocates.
The guidelines mandate that US embassies and consulates involved in compiling the annual global human rights report now consider DEI policies—designed to improve outcomes for specific racial and identity-based groups—as violations. Additionally, the rules label nations that subsidize abortions, facilitate mass or illegal migration, or arrest individuals for speech as human rights infringers. They also specifically condemn gender-transition surgeries for children, referring to them as “chemical or surgical mutilation.”
A senior State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity, stated that the changes aim to stop “destructive ideologies” and align with the belief that rights are “given to us by God, our creator, not by governments.” Deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott emphasized that the administration will not allow violations such as “the mutilation of children” or “racially discriminatory employment practices” to go unchecked, declaring “enough is enough.”
This policy reflects the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to dismantle DEI initiatives domestically, which President Trump has framed as restoring “merit-based opportunity.” By extending this stance to foreign affairs, the administration signals an escalation in its campaign against perceived ideological threats, potentially influencing global human rights standards.
Human rights organizations have strongly condemned the new rules. Uzra Zeya, a former senior State Department official now with Human Rights First, accused the administration of “weaponising international human rights for domestic partisan ends.” She argued that the guidelines exclude protections for women, LGBTQI+ individuals, religious minorities, and others, conveying “jaw-dropping” animosity toward marginalized groups.
The State Department’s annual human rights report has historically been viewed as a comprehensive and impartial assessment, but the latest version released in August was significantly scaled back. It eliminated sections on government corruption and LGBTQ+ persecution while increasing criticism of European democracies for laws against online hate speech. The new instructions further align the report with the administration’s ideological priorities.
This shift is likely to strain diplomatic relations with allied nations that have embraced DEI and other social policies. It may also undermine US credibility in promoting human rights worldwide, as the definitions appear tailored to domestic political debates rather than universal principles.
Looking ahead, the implementation of these rules could lead to increased international tensions and backlash from global bodies. The Trump administration’s redefinition of human rights may set a precedent that influences future discourse, while critics continue to challenge it as a departure from America’s traditional role in defending fundamental freedoms.
