President Donald Trump is poised to make significant changes to U.S. engagement with the United Nations, particularly targeting the UN Human Rights Council and the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). According to Politico, Trump plans to sign an executive order on or before February 4, 2024, which would formally withdraw the United States from the UN Human Rights Council and halt all funding for UNRWA.
This announcement will occur just before Trump’s anticipated meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, signaling the importance of U.S.-Israel relations within these decisions. The timing of these moves aligns with heightened scrutiny and criticism of international organizations like the UN, which some view as biased against Israel. During his first term, Trump took similar steps, positioning his administration as one willing to break with previous norms to align more closely with Israeli interests.
One of the central justifications for these actions relates to accusations against UNRWA concerning its alleged ties to terrorist activities. Reports indicate involvement of UNRWA employees in the events of October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched attacks against Israel. “The council gives undue and disproportionate attention to Israel,” states the White House documentation supporting the rationale for this policy shift.
Trump's first presidency was marked by withdrawal from international agreements and organizations, setting a tone of unilateralism. During his earlier term, he had already led the U.S. out of the Human Rights Council, citing its persistent bias against Israel. Now, as he seeks to reinforce his political base and send strong signals to his allies abroad, these decisions could represent a continuation of this strategy.
Critics of the proposed withdrawal and funding cuts view these moves as dangerous and counterproductive, likely exacerbated tensions between the U.S. and international bodies focused on human rights issues. The U.S. has historically played a significant role within the UN and its various agencies, impacting global humanitarian efforts, particularly in conflict zones such as Gaza.
Filippo Grandi, the head of UNRWA, recently dismissed accusations linking the agency’s actions to terrorist activities as troubling and shocking. He urged for the creation of independent investigative committees to explore these allegations thoroughly. “UNRWA has been forced to evacuate its buildings in Gaza and has since had no control over them,” he stated, attempting to affirm the agency's commitment to neutrality amid growing scrutiny.
The impact of these cuts could spell dire consequences for Palestinian refugees who depend on UNRWA for basic resources, education, and healthcare. Critics warn of the potential humanitarian fallout should funding cease, as displaced communities already face significant challenges. The U.S. has previously been one of the largest donors to UNRWA, with donations averaging around $500 million annually during Trump’s first presidency compared to significantly lower figures from other nations.
While advancing his agenda, Trump faces several dilemmas, one being how to balance domestic political pressures with international moral obligations. His decision to withdraw from the UN Human Rights Council and cut funding aligns with his base's sentiments, demanding strict approaches to international organizations perceived as overly liberal or biased.
Beyond UNRWA, the White House documents lament the UN's failure to address human rights abuses globally, claiming it has served as cover for countries like Syria, Iran, and North Korea. Such statements perpetuate the narrative of organizations failing to uphold the values they claim to represent.
On February 4, as Trump convenes with Netanyahu, discussions will likely center around how the U.S. maintains its commitment to Israel amid changing dynamics on the ground, particularly the ceasefire achieved between Israel and Hamas earlier this month. The framework of U.S.-Israel relations is under scrutiny as both leaders navigate delicate politics surrounding secretary of state reports on radical organizations.
This expected executive order and funding restriction highlight the shifting U.S. strategy toward international governance and humanitarian efforts, which many fear might push the United States away from collaborative approaches often necessary to address global crises. The international community will be watching closely as these developments could reshape longstanding U.S. foreign policy during Trump's current administration.
These decisions, framed within the larger narrative of U.S. engagement with the UN, are likely to provoke strong reactions domestically and internationally, as debates surrounding ethical responsibilities, political accountability, and humanitarian obligations continue—setting the stage for contentious dialogues long past Trump's signature on the executive order.