On January 20th, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO) in a series of executive actions marking the beginning of his second term. Trump called the withdrawal from WHO “a big one”. This decision, echoing his first term’s policy, has stirred significant debate on global health governance, U.S. foreign policy, and the future of international health cooperation.
Background
The decision to withdraw from the WHO was not unprecedented for Trump. During his first term in 2020, he initiated a similar move, criticizing the organization for its handling of the COVID-19 outbreak, alleging mismanagement, and accusing it of being too lenient towards China. However, President Joe Biden reversed this decision upon taking office in 2021. Trump has reiterated his stance, signaling a clear departure from global health collaboration under his administration.
Reasons for Withdrawal
Trump’s executive order cited the WHO’s “mishandling” of the global health crisis, particularly its initial response to the COVID-19 outbreak. The order specifically critiqued the WHO for not demonstrating independence from the political influences of member states, notably China.
Another significant reason was the financial burden on the U.S., contributing approximately 18% of the WHO’s total funding. Trump argued that this contribution was unfairly demanding compared to what other countries, including China, pay despite its larger population. The order mentioned the WHO’s failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, suggesting that the organization lacked transparency and accountability.
Immediate Actions and Implications
Under U.S. law, the withdrawal from international organizations like the WHO requires a one-year notice period. During this time, the U.S. will continue to be a member but will cease negotiations on new treaties, like the WHO’s proposed pandemic treaty, and stop all financial contributions.
The loss of U.S. funding, expertise, and leadership in the WHO could severely hamper global efforts against pandemics and other health issues. Programs aimed at eradicating diseases like polio, malaria, and tuberculosis might face significant setbacks.
The executive order also called for recalling and reassigning U.S. government personnel and contractors working with the WHO, potentially disrupting ongoing collaborations.
Global Reaction
The WHO has not officially responded to the U.S. withdrawal notice but has historically emphasized the need for collective action in global health.
Many public health experts and organizations have expressed concern over the U.S. exit, warning that it could weaken global health security and leave the world less prepared for future health crises. Some, however, see this as an opportunity for other nations to step up and for the WHO to undergo reforms.
Chinese officials have publicly stated that the WHO’s role in global health governance should be strengthened, not weakened, subtly critiquing Trump’s decision.
Legal and Political Challenges
There have been indications that Trump’s order to redefine birthright citizenship alongside the WHO withdrawal might face legal challenges due to constitutional implications. Similar challenges could arise regarding the WHO withdrawal is seen as an overreach of executive power.
Congressional Oversight: While executive orders can bypass congressional approval, Congress can still pass legislation to counteract such actions. Given the narrow Republican majority, the effectiveness of this withdrawal might hinge on legislative support.
Long-term Effects
The withdrawal might further erode U.S. leadership in global health, shifting influence to other countries or regions, potentially leading to a restructuring of international health diplomacy.
There’s speculation on whether Trump would seek to form new health alliances or strengthen bilateral agreements outside the WHO framework, possibly with countries sharing similar views on national sovereignty and global governance.
Trump’s decision to withdraw from the WHO is a significant pivot in U.S. policy, reflecting a broader skepticism towards international institutions. While the immediate effects are clear in terms of funding and engagement, the long-term implications for global health security, U.S. influence in international health policy, and the operational capabilities of the WHO remain to be fully seen. This move could catalyze a period of uncertainty in global health but also potentially spur reforms or new forms of international cooperation.
