"The merits of the case for leaving the UNHRC are unassailable... Unfortunately, the United States has been lending credibility to the council ever since U.S. President Barack Obama decided that America should join it in 2009. Created in 2006, as a replacement for a predecessor body-the Human Rights Commission-that was equally tainted by hatred for the one Jewish state on the planet, U.S. President George W. Bush saw no reason grant the agency any legitimacy. Indeed, with the ranks of its member nations swollen by some of the worst human-rights offenders, the council has become more of a parody of advocacy for the cause of freedom than anything else.
But Obama's faith in multilateralism and the United Nations was such that he overlooked the HRC's faults. For the next eight years, America kept returning to the council even though it was clear that its members viewed it as little more than a platform for venting their indifference to the behavior of genuine human-rights offenders and efforts to brand Israel as a pariah nation...
Human-rights offenders laughed at the empty rhetoric of U.S. representatives. Every year, it continued to pass resolution after resolution damning Israel and barely paying attention to real catastrophes. Secure in the belief that the U.S. and the European democracies were too invested in this institution to hold it accountable, the council became more irresponsible and outrageous as every measure of Israeli self-defense against terror was falsely labeled as a crime...
The debate over Haley's announcement shows that some people are willing to sacrifice Israel and the defense of human rights in order to vilify Trump. But if the anti-Trump 'resistance' is willing to defend the United Nations' worst excesses in order to justify their opposition to this necessary move, then it is they who have lost their moral compass."