The United States this week withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), claiming that the organization was hypocritical, ineffective and biased against Israel. While the move was expected, it is yet another assault on the institutions of international order. The council is not perfect, but it is a venue for discussion and sanction of human rights violations. It is weaker without the U.S. Japan could seize this opportunity to again show international leadership; it is unlikely to do so.

The UNHRC is the successor to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which was dismissed as toothless. Established in 2006, the UNHRC is comprised of 47 U.N. member states who meet three times a year in regular session and whenever one-third of member states can agree on a special session. Members are elected for a three-year term on a regional basis, and cannot serve for more than two consecutive terms. Japan is currently a member of the UNHRC and served three previous terms.

The U.S. has had an uncomfortable relationship with the UNHRC since it was formed. The U.S. voted against its establishment, and then refused to join, arguing that it could do more working from the outside, although U.S. President George W. Bush said he would provide financial support. It obtained observer status but gave that up after two years, charging that the council was biased against Israel and focused on it rather than genuine human rights concerns elsewhere, such as Zimbabwe, North Korea, Iran, Belarus and Cuba. Washington reversed position under President Barack Obama, reasoning that the U.S. could better influence the workings of the council as a member.