
One of the most unexpected and unsettling actions of the American leadership under President Donald Trump, the USA started the procedure of leaving the body of world health. This order signed among the myriad of orders issued within the first weeks of the Trump presidency has attracted much debate and apprehension as to the global health implications and international relations.
The pull out from the WHO is another instance of Trump’s continuous disparagement of the agency and its functioning during the pandemic and what he considers its pro-China stand. Now, it is high time to focus on the analysis of outcomes that have followed this historic and quite predictable decision.
The Decision to Withdraw: Trump’s Bold Stand
This move really signaled a big shift in American diplomacy and its practice in world health politics. This measure that has been made official by an executive order signed shortly after Trump was sworn in as President, has been brewing for months fueled by contentious operational procedure by WHO especially at the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Trump’s Criticism of the WHO
President Trump accused the WHO of:
Mishandling the Pandemic: Trump claimed that the WHO did not coordinate the initial measures to contain the virus and thus the virus continued to spread around the world.
Favoring China: President Trump insisted that WHO was not only politically motivated towards China but also provided assistance for China to conceal the scale of infection at the initial stage.
Inefficiency in Leadership: The administration described the organisation as inefficient, and called for change.
When pulling out of the WHO Trump primarily attempted to express his disappointment in the agency and its top officials, secondly — redirecting the provided funds to domestic and bilateral foreign health initiatives.
Timing and Execution: An Immediate Priority
This determination of signing thinner withdrawal order as one of Trump’s first executive actions reveals the repertoire of the trump administration’s commitment to the flee from multilateral organization they deemed as unhelpful or counterproductive.
The following are critical factors expressed in the Executive Order:
Funding Halt: Trump threatened to cut off all the United State’s funds to WHO and finally proceeded to completely do so. This is important given the fact that United States was the largest financier of WHO contributing roughly $400-$500 million annually, which included 15% of WHO’s budget.
Reallocation of Resources: Speaking of the decision, Trump said that the money that, according to him, had previously been given to the WHO, would be directed toward other global health programs besides those managed by WHO and domestic American programs.
Withdrawal Timeline: In general the process of withdrawal consumes about one year of time according to the international law and Trump signed the executive order to speed this process however the details of this variant were not clear.
Global and Domestic Reactions
There were harsh actions from both domestic and international parties in regard to the withdrawal from the WHO due to different consequences that may occur.
International Backlash
National and international health care leaders, foreign governments, as well as organizations expressed great concern on the withdrawal.
WHO Leadership Response: The current WHO’s Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, apologized for the President’s choice, insisting on the necessity of cooperation in the actions against health threats.
European Leaders: It was greeted with resentment by a number of European countries – Germany and France among them, who deemed the decision as that abreast with the current pandemic and rushing around the world, action in this incident was needed most of all.
Developing Nations: Those depends on the WHO programs voiced concern on where priority US funding will be going leaving key health efforts like polio eradication, vaccines, and surveillance programmes at risk.
Domestic Reactions
Within the United States, the decision sparked a polarized debate:
Supporters: Trump’s supporters welcomed the move saying that WHO had not accomplished its work and America’s hard-earned money should not be used to fund a company that is inclined to be idle.
Critics: Health officials, democrats and other supporters of Obama label the move reckless pointing out that it will obstruct international progress of health and imperil America since it jeopardises early warning systems that alert the world of fresh diseases.
Effects of the US’s Pullout
The American pullout of the WHO is anticipated to have lasting impacts on global health politics and health as well as diplomacy and health in the country.
Global Health Impacts
Funding Gap: The withdrawal of USA funding can reduce WHO capabilities and limit the key programs that have helped low-income countries for immunization, maternal health and disease prevention.
Fragmentation of Global Efforts: The fragmentation may be experienced globally; this can be attributed to the fact that there is no internationally coordinating body to help fight the challenges as witnessed by the absence of the WHO .
Weakened Pandemic Preparedness: Critics have been over warned that ending cooperation with WHO will hinder the international response to future epidemics because WHO serves a crucial purpose of disease detection and collaboration.
Impact on the United States
Reduced Influence: Now, it can decrease its impact on the development of the global health policies losing the leadership to other countries, for instance, China or the European Union, if it has not occurred already.
Domestic Health Risks: Some critics said the move would prove counterproductive, especially if its main objective is to decrease access to health data and timely alarms about threats to global health.
Diplomatic Isolation: The decision will deepen international alienation for America and precipitate and worsen tensions between it and key partners and intergovernmental bodies.
Why Now? The New American Order aka “Trump’s “America First” Agenda
It was not the only action, that contributed to the overall American foreign policy with the slogan of “America first”, implying the concentration upon national rather than global interests.
Throughout his presidency, Trump considered international organizations as ineffective, primarily charging them of bias. Trump’s administration again and again turned to limiting America’s commitment to the international system: pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord or renegotiating NAFTA.
The WHO withdrawal fits this pattern where a belief is made that the organization’s defect outweighs the advantage of continued participation of the United States.
ICD-11 and Beyond: What’s Next for the WHO and United Statesiola
What role will America play in the coming year of world governance and diplomacy, we are left with an array of question marks following the US exit from the WHO.
For the WHO
Replacing US Funding: To finance such spending, the organisation may need to look for other sources of revenues such as getting contribution from other member countries or private firms.
Reforms: Of course, Trump’s criticisms could turn into pressure on the WHO to change its governance and become more transparent.
For the US
Domestic Health Investments: The Trump administration is planning to shift its funding to domestic health programs but people doubt that these measures can recompense for the losses under WHO membership.
Future Re-engagement: Though the withdrawal process has recently been completed, another president might undo the step and bring the country back to the WHO similar to the Paris Climate Agreement situation.