In a move that has sparked widespread concern among public health experts and international leaders, President Trump has signed an executive order to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (W.H.O.). The decision, made just hours after his inauguration, is poised to have far-reaching consequences for global health efforts and the nation’s standing as a leader in combating public health crises.
The reasoning behind the withdrawal from W.H.O.
President Trump’s executive order cited several grievances against the W.H.O., including its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and what he described as a failure to enact critical reforms. He also criticized the financial structure of the organization, claiming that the United States bears an unfair share of the financial burden compared to countries like China.
This decision follows years of tension between Trump and the W.H.O. During his previous term, Trump frequently criticized the agency, alleging mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic and accusing it of being overly influenced by China. Although he initiated steps to withdraw in 2020, his efforts were blocked by then-President Biden upon taking office in 2021.
The impact of withdrawal
Public health experts warn that leaving the W.H.O. could weaken the United States’ ability to respond to global health emergencies and pandemics. The W.H.O. provides critical resources, including access to global data on emerging diseases, which could be compromised without U.S. participation.
For instance, when China released the genetic sequence of the novel coronavirus in 2020, it did so through the W.H.O., enabling nations worldwide to respond swiftly. Without such channels, agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may face delays in accessing vital information, potentially hindering the nation’s ability to prepare for future pandemics.
Broader political and health implications
The W.H.O. has long been a target of criticism from conservatives, particularly for its recent efforts to negotiate a pandemic treaty aimed at improving global preparedness. The treaty proposed measures such as enhanced pathogen surveillance, faster data sharing, and stronger vaccine manufacturing capabilities. However, negotiations on the treaty stalled last year amid backlash from some U.S. lawmakers who viewed it as a potential threat to national sovereignty.
A legacy of global health leadership
Founded in 1948 with significant support from the United States, the W.H.O. has played a critical role in addressing global health challenges. From providing aid in conflict zones to tracking epidemics like Ebola and Zika, the agency’s work has saved countless lives. The United States has traditionally been a major contributor to the W.H.O., funding a significant portion of its $6.8 billion annual budget.
Despite the withdrawal, U.S. disengagement from the W.H.O. will not be immediate. Under a joint resolution adopted by Congress at the organization’s founding, the United States must give a year’s notice and fulfill its financial obligations for the current fiscal year before the withdrawal is finalized.
Looking ahead
The decision to withdraw from the W.H.O. has sparked intense debate about the nation’s role in global health and its capacity to confront future public health emergencies. As the world continues to grapple with the aftermath of COVID-19 and other ongoing health crises, the implications of this withdrawal will likely be felt both domestically and internationally for years to come.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
