Two months after President Donald Trump announced a stop to US commitment with the United Nations Human Rights Council, Washington affects his work by applying pressure publicly and behind the scenes, seven diplomats and rights workers said.

The United States left its seat empty during a six-week session in the 47-member council, which ended on Friday, but its lobbying and pressure had some success, the sources of Reuters told.

They said the United States, who has accused the Council of an anti-Israeli bias, had focused on blasting a proposal from Pakistan on the establishment of an international, impartial and independent mechanism (IIIM), the most strict type of UN investigation, about Israel’s actions in the occupied Palestinian territories.

The version of Pakistan’s proposal adopted Wednesday by the Council, whose mission is to promote and protect human rights around the world, did not include the creation of IIIM.

The Council already has a study of the Investigation Commission on the Palestinian territories, but Pakistan’s proposal would have created an additional probe with extra powers to collect evidence of possible use in international courts.

A letter from March 31 sent by Brian Mast, chairman of the US Foreign Committee, and James R Risch, chairman of the Senate Foreign Committee, warned against voting the proposal.

“Any HRC Member State or UN device that supports an Israeli specific IIM … will face the same consequences that ICC faces,” the letter said.

It appeared to refer to sanctions approved by the Representant House of the International Criminal Court in protest by its arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister and former Minister of Defense over Israel’s campaign in Gaza.

The final version of Pakistan’s proposal only referred to an invitation to the UN General Assembly to consider an IIIM in the future.

Two Geneva-based diplomats said they had received messages from US diplomats before changing the wording that asked them to oppose the new study. “They said,” Back on this question, “said someone who spoke on condition of anonymity.

A spokesman for the US Department of State said it complied with the executive order signed by Trump on February 4 who pulled the United States out of the council and would not participate in it and add: “As a matter of politics, we do not comment on private diplomatic conversations.”

“The US seems to be trying to have it both ways. It doesn’t want to pay for or join the UN, but it still wants to boss it around,” said Lucy McKernan, deputy director of the United Nations at Human Rights Watch’s Geneva Office.

‘Raw Power’

The United States and Israel are not members of the Council, but like all UN Member States have informal observer status and a seat in the council’s meeting room.

International human rights institutions are now at a critical time, said Phil Lynch, director of the International Service of Human Rights, a non-state organization.

“We potentially confront a future characterized by lawlessness and raw power,” he said.

The United States was once the top donor of the UN Rights System, but Trump has said the UN “is not well run” and to help -cut out his administration has forced scalabacks.

The United States and Israel have also opposed the mandate of one of the Council’s independent experts during this session.

The Israeli ambassador said on March 24 that Francesca Albanese, a critic of Israeli acts in Gaza, had violated a UN Code of Conduct through “Obviously anti -Semitic behavior and discourse,” a diplomatic note shows.

The American spokesman for the state department said Albanese was “unfit for his role.”

“The correspondence received is under consideration,” said Council spokesman Pascal Sim, adding that when the council makes a nomination, “does it with the knowledge that the mandate owner is expected to earn up to six years in this function.”

The internal body that ensures that the UN experts comply with a code of conduct condemned what it described as a coordinated campaign against Albanese, according to a letter from the Coordination Committee for Special Procedures dated March 28.

It found no evidence of supporting Israel’s complaints about Albanese. However, it introduces social media guidelines for UN experts in the light of some concerns raised over her X -positions.