On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump officially signed the executive order to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), reigniting controversy over the country's relationship with global health governance. This marks the second time Trump has initiated such action, emphasizing his long-standing dissatisfaction with WHO's management of the COVID-19 pandemic and its global health initiatives.
During his first presidential term, Trump openly criticized WHO for its handling of the pandemic, which emerged from Wuhan, China, and noted several grievances outlined in this latest executive order. According to the statement released by the White House, one of the primary arguments for disengagement was WHO's perceived failure to endorse urgently needed reforms and its lack of independence from undesirable political influences of member states.
The decision to withdraw is reflective of Trump’s broader stance on international organizations. He stated, "The WHO continues to demand unjustly burdensome payments from the US, which are significantly disproportionate to assessed contributions from other countries." This assertion dovetails with his previous claims made during his first term when he argued about the unfair financial burden place on the United States compared to countries like China.
For Trump, the discrepancies were glaring. He pointed out, "China, with its 1.4 billion population, disburses almost 90% less than the US to WHO." This comparison attempts to highlight what his administration considers the unfair financial obligation the US has toward the organization, and it forms part of Trump’s narrative of sovereignty and prioritizing American interests.
On his first day back as president, Trump also reaffirmed his administration's intent to discard multiple international agreements from climate accords to health regulations stating, "The successful experience of the United States achieving both economic and environmental goals should serve as a model for other countries." His rhetoric frames the withdrawal as not merely beneficial for the US but perceived as setting a precedent for the rest of the world.
Trump's administration has not only garnered criticism from global health experts, but this withdrawal also echoes sentiments expressed throughout his previous tenure, where he was often at odds with the global health community. Critics highlight the potential negative ramifications of cutting ties with WHO at such a precarious time when collaborative global health responses are increasingly necessary.
With the retreat from WHO, observers are left wondering about the future of US public health policy and its reliance on international cooperation. The consequences of Trump’s actions could resonate far beyond immediate health discourse, impacting diplomatic relationships and global public health initiatives.
Following Trump’s announcement, WHO has not commented on the new president's decision yet. The organization's response may shape how the future of global health collaboration is perceived moving forward during and after the pandemic.
It remains to be seen how this withdrawal will be executed under the current geopolitical climate and what it means for America's role on the world stage, especially considering the increasing strain on international relations due to health disparities and the global pandemic.
For public health experts and advocates alike, Trump's announcement is yet another signal of the potential isolationism of US policy under his leadership, raising urgent questions about leadership, funding, and the direction of international health initiatives as the world grapples with crises of unprecedented scale.