The United States formally withdraws from the World Health Organization
The US has completed its withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO), finalizing a longstanding goal of President Donald Trump, reports BritPanorama.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the termination of all US government funding to WHO on Thursday, stating that all personnel and contractors embedded with the organization have been recalled. The United States has ceased its participation in WHO-sponsored committees, leadership bodies, governance structures, and technical working groups.
This decision comes after President Trump attempted to withdraw from WHO during his first term and subsequently issued an executive order on the first day of his second term, formally notifying the organization. Under US law, the country is required to give WHO a one-year notice and settle all outstanding fees before leaving. Currently, the US owes approximately $260 million; however, legal experts suggest that payment is unlikely and that WHO has limited recourse to enforce this obligation.
As a matter of law, the US cannot officially withdraw from WHO without addressing its financial obligations, said Dr. Lawrence Gostin, a global health law expert at Georgetown University. He noted that although WHO could pass a resolution to that effect, the organization is unlikely to risk further tension given that the Trump administration appears determined to proceed with the withdrawal.
While HHS has severed most ties, there remains the possibility of continued discussions on collaboration. When asked about US participation in an upcoming WHO-led meeting regarding next year’s flu vaccines, officials indicated that conversations are still ongoing.
During a call with reporters, a senior official from the administration described the US’ relationship with WHO as unsatisfactory, asserting that the country was “not getting much return for our value” in contributions. The official characterized the withdrawal as a commitment fulfilled, asserting that WHO has acted contrary to US interests during the Covid-19 pandemic, notably in its handling of critical early warnings and assertions regarding the virus’s spread.
Criticism of WHO’s leadership during the pandemic has been voiced by the administration, with HHS contending that WHO delayed declaring a global public health emergency, resulting in the loss of critical weeks as the virus spread. Additionally, the agency faulted WHO for praising China’s response despite evidence suggesting early underreporting and suppression of information.
This radical shift has raised concerns among public health experts regarding the implications of the US withdrawal. Critics argue that managing global health through bilateral agreements will create a fragmented system falling short of the comprehensive approach offered by WHO. Dr. Ronald Nahass, president of the Infectious Disease Society of America, described the withdrawal as “shortsighted and misguided,” emphasizing that global cooperation is essential for public health safety.
Moreover, experts like Dr. Gostin warned that US non-participation in WHO could compromise national and global security by limiting access to critical epidemiological data and genomic sequencing necessary for effective responses to infectious disease threats. The specter of future pandemics looms large, and the capacity to collaborate internationally to mitigate these risks is in jeopardy, they argue.
This departure from WHO, a previously indispensable partner in global health initiatives, signifies a significant transition in US health policy, leaving many questions about future strategies for international collaboration. The implication is clear—this story will continue to unfold as global health dynamics shift.
