Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw the USA from the World Well being Group (WHO) has been met with dismay within the public well being discipline.
Some have known as one of many US president’s first govt orders “a grave error” and “absolutely bad news”.
What does the WHO do?
The WHO is a United Nations agency that goals to increase common well being protection, coordinates responses to well being emergencies comparable to pandemics, and has a broad concentrate on wholesome lives. It doesn’t have the facility to implement well being coverage, however influences coverage worldwide, particularly in low-income international locations.
The WHO performs a vital coordinating position in surveillance, response and coverage for infectious and non-infectious ailments. In reality, infectious ailments have probably the most urgent want for international coordination. Not like non-communicable ailments, infections can unfold quickly from one nation to a different, just as COVID spread to trigger a pandemic.
We’ve got a lot to thank the WHO for, together with the eradication of smallpox, a feat which couldn’t have been achieved with out international coordination and management. It has additionally performed a number one position in command of polio and HIV.
Why does the US wish to withdraw?
The reasons for withdrawing embrace:
mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic … and different international well being crises, its failure to undertake urgently wanted reforms, and its incapability to display independence from the inappropriate political affect of WHO member states.
The manager order additionally cites the disproportionately higher payments the US makes to the WHO compared to China. In 2024-25, the US contributed 22% of the organisation’s necessary funding from member states in comparison with about 15% for China.
President Trump initiated withdrawal from the WHO over related considerations in 2020. However this was reversed by President Biden in 2021.
What occurs subsequent?
The withdrawal could take a 12 months to come back into impact, and may need approval by the US Congress.
How this can play out is unclear, but it surely appears doubtless the WHO will lose US funding.
The US withdrawal may additionally be the ultimate nail within the coffin for the WHO Pandemic Settlement, which faltered in 2024 when member states couldn’t agree on the ultimate draft.
Trump’s govt order states all negotiations across the pandemic settlement will stop. Nonetheless, the order hints that the US will have a look at working with worldwide companions to deal with international well being.
The US Centers for Disease and Control (CDC) already has such worldwide companions and will feasibly do that. It already convenes a global network of training in outbreak response, which might present a mannequin. However to maneuver on this route wants finessing, as one other goal of the brand new US authorities is to reduce or cease international aid.
The WHO additionally convenes a spread of professional committees and networks of reference laboratories. One amongst many community of laboratories is for influenza, comprising more than 50 labs in 41 member states. This consists of 5 “tremendous labs”, one in all which is on the CDC. It’s unclear what would occur to such networks, a lot of which have main US elements.
With the specter of hen flu mutating to become a human pandemic these international networks are crucial for surveillance of pandemic threats.
riza korhan oztunc/Shutterstock
WHO professional committees additionally drive global health policy on a spread of points. It’s doable for the WHO to accredit labs in non-member international locations, or for specialists from non-member international locations to be on WHO professional committees. However how this can unfold, particularly for US government-funded labs or specialists who’re US authorities workers, is unclear.
One other potential influence of a US withdrawal is the chance for different highly effective member nations to develop into extra influential as soon as the US leaves. This may occasionally result in restrictions on US specialists sitting on WHO committees or working with the organisation in different methods.
Whereas the US withdrawal will see the WHO lose funding, member states contribute about 20% of the WHO funds. The organisation depends on donations from different organisations (together with non-public firms and philanthropic organisations), which make up the remaining 80%. So the US withdrawal could improve the affect of those different organisations.
An opportunity for reform
The Trump administration isn’t alone in its criticism of how the WHO dealt with COVID and different infectious illness outbreaks.
For instance, the WHO agreed with Chinese authorities in early January 2020 there was no proof the “thriller pneumonia” in Wuhan was contagious, whereas in actuality it was likely already spreading for months. This was a expensive mistake.
There was criticism over WHO’s delay in declaring the pandemic, stating COVID was not airborne (despite evidence otherwise). There was additionally criticism about its investigation into the origins of COVID, together with conflicts of interest within the investigating workforce.
The WHO was also criticised for its dealing with of the Ebola epidemic in West Africa a decade in the past. Eventually, this led to a series of reforms, however arguably not sufficient.
Sergey Uryadnikov/Shutterstock
Extra adjustments wanted
US public well being professional Ashish Jha argues for reform at WHO. Jha, who’s the dean of the Brown College College of Public Well being and former White Home COVID response coordinator, argues the organisation has an unclear mission, too broad a remit, poor governance and sometimes prioritises political sensitivities of member states.
He proposes the WHO ought to slim its focus to fewer areas, with outbreak response key. This is able to permit decreased funding for use extra effectively.
Relatively than the US withdrawing from the WHO, he argues the US can be higher to stay a member and leverage such reform.
With out reform, there’s a risk different international locations could observe the US, particularly if governments are pressured by their electorates to extend spending on home wants.
The WHO has asked the US to rethink withdrawing. However the organisation might have to take a look at additional reforms for any risk of future negotiations. That is the perfect path towards an answer.
