In yet another defiant act of U.S. isolationism, President Donald Trump signed an executive order on February 3, 2025, officially severing America’s ties with the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The move, which halts all U.S. involvement and funding to the council, has drawn immediate backlash from human rights advocates and world leaders who warn that this decision emboldens oppressive regimes and weakens global efforts to hold violators accountable.
Trump’s administration justified the withdrawal by accusing the council of “anti-American bias” and claiming that it has failed in its mission to protect human rights. “The UNHRC has devolved into a political tool that unfairly targets the United States and its allies while allowing actual human rights abusers to escape scrutiny,” the executive order states. The administration also accuses the council of promoting anti-Semitism, pointing to its frequent criticisms of Israel.
However, critics see this as a blatant excuse to distance the U.S. from international accountability. Representative Jim McGovern slammed the move as “reckless and shameful,” arguing that it delivers a win to dictators and undermines America’s ability to influence global human rights policies. Human rights organizations fear that by walking away, the U.S. is sending a clear message: human rights violations will no longer be a priority in American foreign policy.
Beyond the council withdrawal, the executive order also ends U.S. funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which provides essential aid to Palestinian refugees. This decision is expected to deepen the humanitarian crisis in the region and further inflame tensions in the Middle East.
The implications of this withdrawal extend beyond symbolism. Without U.S. involvement, authoritarian governments may gain more influence in shaping human rights discussions, further undermining the council’s already fragile credibility. Additionally, the U.S. risks losing diplomatic leverage in negotiations concerning global human rights abuses, making it harder to push back against violations in countries like China, Russia, and North Korea.
Supporters of Trump’s decision argue that the UNHRC has long been dysfunctional, allowing some of the world’s worst human rights offenders—such as Venezuela and China—to maintain membership while avoiding meaningful consequences. They see the withdrawal as a necessary step to push for reform.
Regardless of one’s stance, this move marks a clear shift in America’s role on the world stage. Rather than leading the fight for human rights, the U.S. is retreating from it, leaving a vacuum that may be filled by nations with far less regard for freedom and democracy. As the world watches, one question remains: who will take up the mantle of human rights advocacy in America’s absence?
