On the first day of his second term, Donald Trump initiated the process of withdrawing the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), fulfilling a campaign promise and sparking significant global debate.
This decision stemmed from Trump’s dissatisfaction with the WHO, particularly its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. He accused the organization of being “slow to respond” and unduly influenced by China. As Trump claimed, “World Health lied to us,” summarizing his criticism of the agency’s transparency and effectiveness. Legally, the withdrawal follows the guidelines set by the WHO’s founding agreements, requiring a one-year notice for termination.
The ramifications of this withdrawal are profound, particularly for the WHO. The United States, historically its largest donor, provided over $1.2 billion in funding over two years. The absence of this financial support jeopardizes essential programs addressing global health challenges. Professor Lawrence Gostin described the move as
Critics have highlighted the geopolitical consequences, with countries like China and Russia potentially expanding their influence within the WHO. Elisha Dunn-Georgiou noted that this withdrawal creates “a vacuum that other countries will be eager to fill.” On the other hand, proponents of the move argue that the United States can redirect its resources to other international health initiatives such as UNAIDS, GAVI, and the Global Fund, which they consider more effective in addressing global issues.
Ultimately, the decision to withdraw raises critical concerns about the need for international cooperation in addressing global health threats. While the political debate continues, the broader implications for global health systems underscore the indispensable role of collaboration in mitigating pandemics and other shared challenges.
