Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization ( WHO ) has been met with dismay in the public health field. Some have called one of the US president ’s first executive orders “a grave error ” and “absolutely bad news. ”
The WHO is a United Nations agency that aims to expand universal health coverage, coordinates actions to health emergencies such as epidemics, and has a large emphasis on healthy life. It does not have the power to enforce heath plan but influences plan worldwide, especially in low-income places.
The WHO plays an important coordinating position in surveillance, reaction and policy for communicable and non-infectious illnesses. In reality, infectious diseases have the most pressing need for international cooperation.
Unlike non-communicable illnesses, diseases can spread quickly from one state to another, just as Covid spread to trigger a crisis.
We have much to thank the WHO for, including the eradication of smallpox, a miracle which could not have been achieved without international cooperation and authority. It has also played a major role in control of influenza and HIV.
Why does the US want to remove?
The causes for receiving include:
mishandling of the Covid-19 epidemic … and other global wellbeing crises, its failing to follow urgently needed reforms, and its ability to show independence from the improper political influence of WHO member states.
The professional buy also cites the wealthier higher bills the US makes to the WHO compared to China. In 2024-25, the US contributed 22 % of the organization’s mandatory funding from member states compared to approximately 15 % for China.
President Trump initiated departure from the WHO over related problems in 2020. But this was reversed by President Biden in 2021.
What happens future?
The departure may take a year to come into effect, and may require approval by the US Congress. How this will play out is vague, but it seems plausible the WHO will reduce US money.
The US removal may also be the final nail in the coffin for the WHO Pandemic Agreement, which faltered in 2024 when member state may not agree on the final document.
Trump’s professional order states all conversations around the epidemic agreement will continue. However, the buy clues that the US will look at working with global partners to address global health.
The US Centers for Disease and Control ( CDC ) already has such international partners and could feasibly do this. It now convenes a global system of teaching in pandemic response, which could provide a model. But to move in this direction needs finessing, as another target of the fresh US state is to reduce or stop foreign aid.
The WHO likewise convenes a range of professional commissions and network of research facilities. One among many sites of lab is for virus, comprising more than 50 laboratories in 41 member says. This includes five “super labs”, one of which is at the CDC. It’s questionable what may happen to like networks, many of which have significant US components.
With the threat of bird flu mutating to become a people crisis these international systems are critical for monitoring of pandemic risks.
WHO expert committees also drive global health policy on a range of issues. It is possible for the WHO to accredit labs in non-member countries, or for experts from non-member countries to be on WHO expert committees. But how this will unfold, especially for US government-funded labs or experts who are US government employees, is unclear.
Another potential impact of a US withdrawal is the opportunity for other powerful member nations to become more influential once the US leaves. This may lead to restrictions on US experts sitting on WHO committees or working with the organization in other ways.
While the US withdrawal will see the WHO lose funding, member states contribute about 20 % of the WHO budget. The organization relies on donations from other organizations ( including private companies and philanthropic organizations ), which make up the remaining 80 %.
So the US withdrawal may increase the influence of these other organizations.
A chance for reform
The Trump administration is not alone in its criticism of how the WHO handled COVID and other infectious disease outbreaks.
For example, the WHO agreed with Chinese authorities in early January 2020 there was no evidence the “mystery pneumonia” in Wuhan was contagious, while in reality, it was likely already spreading for months. This was a costly mistake.
There was criticism over WHO’s delay in declaring the pandemic, stating Covid was not airborne ( despite evidence otherwise ). There was also criticism about its investigation into the origins of Covid, including conflicts of interest in the investigating team.
The WHO was also criticized for its handling of the Ebola epidemic in West Africa a decade ago. Eventually, this led to a series of reforms, but arguably not enough.
More changes needed
US public health expert Ashish Jha argues for reform at WHO. Jha, who is the dean of the Brown University School of Public Health and former White House COVID response coordinator, argues the organization has an unclear mission, too broad a remit, poor governance and often prioritizes political sensitivities of member states.
He proposes the WHO should narrow its focus to fewer areas, with outbreak response key. This would allow reduced funding to be used more efficiently.
Rather than the US withdrawing from the WHO, he argues the US would be better to remain a member and leverage such reform.
Without reform, there is a possibility other countries may follow the US, especially if governments are pressured by their electorates to increase spending on domestic needs.
The WHO has asked the US to reconsider withdrawing. But the organization may need to look at further reforms for any possibility of future negotiations. This is the best path toward a solution.
C Raina MacIntyre is professor of global biosecurity, NHMRC L3 research fellow, head, biosecurity program, Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.