On his first day in office, U.S. President Donald Trump made a significant move in international health policy by signing an executive order aimed at initiating the withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO). This decision comes after previous criticisms made by Trump regarding the WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, which he and his administration deemed inadequate and biased, particularly towards China, where the virus initially emerged. The newly inaugurated president expressed enthusiasm about the order, describing it as a “big one” as he put pen to paper upon returning to the White House.
This marks the second attempt under Trump’s leadership to disengage from the WHO. The initial steps to withdraw were taken during the pandemic, but those actions were reversed when President Joe Biden took office. By implementing this executive action at the onset of his administration, Trump has underscored his commitment to seeing the withdrawal through, suggesting that the likelihood of a formal exit from the agency has increased.
During a discussion in the Oval Office, Trump conveyed a sense of negotiation, indicating that the WHO would be keen to have the U.S. back, leaving room for speculation about a potential future relationship between the two. His statement, “They wanted us back so badly, so we’ll see what happens,” implied an ongoing discourse between the two parties.
In the order itself, the U.S. government cited several reasons for the withdrawal, including the WHO’s alleged mishandling of the COVID-19 crisis, its failures to enact necessary reforms, and a perceived lack of independence from political influences of its member states. The Trump administration’s narrative included criticism of what they deemed “unfrairly onerous payments” the U.S. was making to the WHO, an organization under the United Nations umbrella.
Public health experts have voiced grave concerns regarding the implications of this withdrawal. Criticism has arisen that such a move could hinder global efforts to combat infectious diseases, including malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS, thereby jeopardizing the health of not just Americans, but populations worldwide. Ashish Jha, who served as the COVID-19 response coordinator in Biden’s administration, warned that leaving the WHO would damage not only global health outcomes but also diminish U.S. leadership in the realm of public health and scientific progress.
Lawrence Gostin, a distinguished expert in global public health and a professor at Georgetown University, characterized the move as a “cataclysmic presidential decision,” suggesting that the ramifications of withdrawal would represent a significant harm to international health initiatives and a profound setback for the United States’ standing on the global stage.
Despite Trump’s announcement to pull out, the Biden administration maintained leadership in funding for the WHO, contributing nearly 20% of the organization’s annual budget in 2023. The total annual budget for the WHO stands at $6.8 billion (£5.5 billion), underscoring the U.S.’s pivotal role in supporting global health initiatives.
The atmosphere surrounding this executive decision reflects Trump’s broader strategy of challenging multilateral institutions and agreements. His intention to redefine U.S. engagement with global governing bodies represents a departure from traditional diplomacy and international cooperation, pushing for a more insulated approach to foreign policy. As the situation develops, the implications of this withdrawal will likely catalyze extensive debate about the U.S.’s role in global health moving forward.
In summary, Trump’s executive order to commence the U.S. withdrawal from the WHO represents a significant shift in public health policy, inviting intense scrutiny from health experts and global stakeholders while raising concerns about its long-term impact on health crises worldwide.
