What Leaving The World Health Organization Means for the United States and the World

Impacts of the United States leaving the WHO

---

Written on February 17th, 2025

Written by Sua Jo

The United States’ recent decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization has ignited considerable discourse among policymakers, public health experts and global leaders. According to the White House, President Donald Trump issued an executive order initiating the process on January 25, 2025, citing concerns over the WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and alleged financial mismanagement. The withdrawal carries profound ramifications for both domestic and international public health initiatives.

Established in 1948 as a specialized agency of the United Nations, the WHO functions as the preeminent global health institution, striving to promote well-being, ensure health security and support vulnerable populations. The organization works to combat infectious diseases, improve maternal and child health and strengthen healthcare systems worldwide. Among its most significant accomplishments are the eradication of smallpox, polio reduction efforts and orchestrating international responses to health crises, including the COVID-19 outbreak. The WHO collaborates with research institutions, member states and NGOs to set international health standards, provide technical assistance and coordinate responses to public health crises, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

The United States has historically served as one of the WHO’s principal financial contributors, playing a pivotal role in global health policy. According to The Associated Press, the decision to sever ties led to the termination of U.S. government funding and participation in the WHO. In response, WHO officials expressed disappointment, emphasizing the indispensable nature of international cooperation in addressing global health threats. In an official statement, the WHO reaffirmed its commitment to working with all nations, including the U.S., to protect global health security.

Public health experts warn the withdrawal could have severe consequences for global health initiatives. UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health argued that leaving the WHO could jeopardize critical programs, including those focused on eradicating polio, preventing pandemics and addressing non-communicable diseases. Additionally, Professor Stefano M. Bertozzi stated that the absence of U.S. support and funding may weaken the WHO’s ability to coordinate responses to future health crises, potentially increasing the risks of uncontrolled disease outbreaks worldwide. Domestically, the withdrawal has already precipitated immediate disruptions. AP stated the CDC was ordered to cease collaboration with WHO, a move catching many health officials off guard. This sudden policy shift could impair efforts to track and respond to global health threats, such as avian flu and emerging viral diseases, which leaves the U.S. more vulnerable to health crises that transcend national borders.

Beyond health concerns, the withdrawal from the WHO raises broader geopolitical questions. The decision signals a shift away from multilateral engagement in global health governance and could undermine the U.S.’s influence in shaping international health policy. According to The Guardian, other global powers, particularly China, are poised to expand their role within the WHO, shaping policies and priorities in ways that diverge from U.S. strategic interests as the country steps back. Critics argue that withdrawing from the WHO isolates the U.S. at a time when international collaboration is more crucial than ever. According to Reuters, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention has expressed concern about the impact on health initiatives across the continent, particularly those that rely on WHO support for vaccine distribution and disease prevention groups.

While the Trump administration has framed the withdrawal as an effort to ensure fiscal accountability and national sovereignty, many experts argue the decision is short-sighted. Historically, the WHO has played a decisive role in past global health triumphs. The U.S. has long leveraged its engagement in the WHO to advance public health goals while maintaining a leadership position on the global stage. Several lawmakers and public health officials have advocated for reversing the decision, arguing the risks outweigh the perceived benefits.

The United States’ withdrawal from WHO represents a watershed moment in global health policy, carrying far-reaching implications for public health, international diplomacy and geopolitical strategy. Proponents argue the move addresses concerns regarding the WHO’s governance and financial transparency, while dissenters warn disengagement from the organization may compromise pandemic preparedness, disrupt health initiatives and diminish U.S. leadership on the world stage. As the global community continues to confront evolving health challenges, the long-term implications of this decision will be closely scrutinized.

---