Trump Withdraws U.S. from World Health Organization, Sparking Global Concerns
On his first day back in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order withdrawing the United States from the World Health Organization (W.H.O.). The decision, which comes amid ongoing debates over global health leadership, has drawn criticism from public health experts who warn it could undermine pandemic preparedness and global health collaboration.
Reasons Behind the Withdrawal
Citing what he described as the W.H.O.’s "mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic" and failure to implement "urgently needed reforms," Trump justified the withdrawal as a move to protect American interests. He also criticized the financial structure of the organization, claiming the U.S. faces "unfairly onerous payments" compared to countries like China.
“The United States cannot continue to fund an organization that does not prioritize accountability or reform,” Trump stated in his executive order. This echoes his earlier criticisms of the W.H.O. during his 2020 presidency when he accused the organization of being overly deferential to China during the initial stages of the COVID-19 outbreak.
Implications for Public Health
The W.H.O., founded in 1948 with significant U.S. involvement, has been instrumental in addressing global health crises, including Ebola, Zika, and COVID-19. Experts fear that the U.S. withdrawal could hinder access to vital health data, disrupt vaccine and treatment supply chains, and reduce the global response capacity for emerging diseases.
Lawrence O. Gostin, a public health law expert at Georgetown University, described the move as “a grievous wound to public health but an even deeper wound to American national interests and national security.” He emphasized the importance of the W.H.O.’s role in global disease surveillance and pandemic response.
Global and Domestic Backlash
Critics argue that the withdrawal isolates the U.S. from critical international partnerships during a time when global health threats are increasingly interconnected. The W.H.O. provides essential resources, including outbreak data and technical assistance, that benefit both the U.S. and other nations.
Domestically, the decision has drawn condemnation from health advocates and opposition lawmakers. They argue that the move jeopardizes the nation’s leadership in global health and limits its ability to respond effectively to future pandemics.
What Happens Next?
According to the terms of the U.S. agreement with the W.H.O., withdrawal requires a year’s notice and payment of outstanding financial obligations. This means the U.S. will remain a W.H.O. member until at least January 2026, during which time Congress may attempt to reverse or delay the decision.
A Shift in Global Health Policy
The withdrawal also reflects growing divisions within the U.S. over global governance and sovereignty. Critics of the W.H.O.’s proposed “pandemic treaty,” aimed at strengthening global health preparedness, have argued that such agreements threaten national sovereignty. Trump’s decision aligns with these sentiments, signaling a shift toward unilateral approaches to health policy.
As the U.S. begins the formal process of exiting the W.H.O., the move raises critical questions about its role in global health governance and its preparedness for future pandemics. While Trump’s administration insists the decision reflects a commitment to prioritizing American interests, public health experts warn it could have far-reaching consequences for global health security.
