For decades, the United States has held considerable power in determining the direction of global health policies and programs. President Donald Trump issued three executive orders on his first day in office that may signal the end of that era, health policy experts said.
°Ő°ůłÜłžąčâs from the World Health Organization means the U.S. will probably not be at the table in February when the WHO executive board next convenes. The WHO is shaped by its members: 194 countries that set health priorities and make agreements about how to share critical data, treatments, and vaccines during international emergencies. With the U.S. missing, it would cede power to others.
âItâs just stupid,â said Kenneth Bernard, a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University who served as a top biodefense official during the George W. Bush administration. âWithdrawing from the WHO leaves a gap in global health leadership that will be filled by China,â he said, âwhich is clearly not in Americaâs best interests.â
Executive orders to withdraw from the WHO and to reassess Americaâs cite the WHOâs âmishandling of the COVID-19 pandemicâ and say that U.S. aid serves âto destabilize world peace.â In action, they echo priorities established in âs âMandate for Leadership,â a conservative policy blueprint from the Heritage Foundation.
The 922-page report says the U.S. âmust be preparedâ to withdraw from the WHO, citing its âmanifest failure,â and advises an overhaul to international aid at the State Department. âThe Biden Administration has deformed the agency by treating it as a global platform to pursue overseas a divisive political and cultural agenda that promotes abortion, climate extremism, gender radicalism, and interventions against perceived systemic racism,â it says.
As one of the worldâs largest funders of global health â through both international and national agencies, such as the WHO and the U.S. Agency for International Development â Americaâs step back may curtail efforts to provide lifesaving health care and combat deadly outbreaks, especially in lower-income countries without the means to do so alone.
âThis not only makes Americans less safe, it makes the citizens of other nations less safe,â said Tom Bollyky, director of global health at the Council on Foreign Relations.
âThe U.S. cannot wall itself off from transnational health threats,â he added, referring to policies that block travelers from countries with disease outbreaks. âMost of the indicates that they provide a false sense of security and distract nations from taking the actions they need to take domestically to ensure their safety.â
Less Than 1%
Technically, countries cannot withdraw from the WHO until a year after official notice. But °Ő°ůłÜłžąčâs executive order cites his termination notice from 2020. If Congress or the public , the administration can argue that more than a year has elapsed.
Trump suspended funds to the WHO in 2020, a measure that doesnât require congressional approval. U.S. contributions to the agency hit a low of during that first year of covid, falling behind Germany and the Gates Foundation. Former President Joe Biden restored U.S. membership and payments. In 2023, the country gave the WHO .
As for 2024, Suerie Moon, a co-director of the global health center at the Geneva Graduate Institute, said the Biden administration paid for 2024-25 early, which will cover some of this yearâs payments.
âUnfairly onerous paymentsâ are cited in the executive order as a reason for WHO withdrawal. Countriesâ dues are a percentage of their gross domestic product, meaning that as the worldâs richest nation, the United States has generally paid more than other countries.
Funds for the WHO represent about 4% of Americaâs , which in turn is less than 0.1% of U.S. federal expenditures each year. At about $3.4 billion, the WHOâs entire budget is roughly a third of the budget for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which got $9.3 billion in core funding in 2023.
The WHOâs funds support programs to prevent and treat polio, tuberculosis, HIV, malaria, measles, and other diseases, especially in countries that struggle to provide health care domestically. The organization also responds to health emergencies in conflict zones, including places where the U.S. government doesnât operate â in parts of Gaza, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, among others.
In January 2020, the WHO alerted the world to the danger of the covid outbreak by sounding its highest alarm: a public health emergency of international concern. Over the next two years, it vetted diagnostic tests and potential drugs for covid, regularly updated the public, and advised countries on steps to keep citizens safe.
Experts have cited missteps at the agency, but that internal problems account for the United Statesâ having one of the worldâs highest rates of death due to covid. âAll nations received the WHOâs alert of a public health emergency of international concern on Jan. 30,â Bollyky said. âSouth Korea, Taiwan, and others responded aggressively to that â the U.S. did not.â
âItâs a Red Herringâ
Nonetheless, °Ő°ůłÜłžąčâs executive order accuses the WHO of âmishandlingâ the pandemic and failing âto adopt urgently needed reforms.â In fact, the WHO has made some changes through bureaucratic processes that involve input from the countries belonging to it. Last year, for example, the organization to its regulations on health emergencies. These include provisions on transparent reporting and coordinated financing.
âIf the Trump administration tried to push for particular reforms for a year and then they were frustrated, I might find the reform line credible,â Moon said. âBut to me, itâs a red herring.â
âI donât buy the explanations,â Bernard said. âThis is not an issue of money,â he added. âThere is no rationale to withdraw from the WHO that makes sense, including our problems with China.â
Trump has accused the WHO of being complicit in Chinaâs failure to openly investigate covidâs origin, which he alludes to in the executive order as âinappropriate political influence.â
âThe World Health Organization disgracefully covered the tracks of the Chinese Communist Party every single step of the way,â Trump said in posted to social media in 2023.
On multiple occasions, the WHO has from China. The agency doesnât have the legal authority to force China, or any other country, to do what it says. This fact also repudiates °Ő°ůłÜłžąčâs warnings that a pandemic treaty under negotiation at the WHO impinges on American sovereignty. Rather, the accord aims to lay out how countries can better cooperate in the next pandemic.
°Ő°ůłÜłžąčâs executive order calls for the U.S. to âcease negotiationsâ on the pandemic agreement. This means the pharmaceutical industry may lose one of its staunchest defenders as discussions move forward.
In the negotiations so far, the U.S. and the European Union have sided with lobbying from the to uphold strict patent rights on drugs and vaccines. They have from middle-income countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America to include licensing agreements that would allow more companies to produce drugs and vaccines when supplies are short in a crisis. A estimated that more than a million lives would have been saved had covid vaccines been available around the world in 2021.
âOnce the U.S. is absent â for better and for worse â there will be less pressure on certain positions,â Moon said. âIn the pandemic agreement negotiations, we may see weakening opposition towards more public-health-oriented approaches to intellectual property.â
âThis is a moment of geopolitical shift because the U.S. is making itself less relevant,â said Ayoade Alakija, chair of the Africa Unionâs Vaccine Delivery Alliance. Alakija said countries in Asia and Africa with emerging economies might now put more money into the WHO, change policies, and set agendas that were previously opposed by the U.S. and European countries that are grappling with the war in Ukraine. âPower is shifting hands,â Alakija said. âMaybe that will give us a more equitable and fairer world in the long term.â
Echoes of Project 2025
In the near term, however, the WHO is unlikely to recoup its losses entirely, Moon said. Funds from the U.S. typically account for about 15% of its budget. Together with °Ő°ůłÜłžąčâs that pauses international aid for 90 days, a lack of money may keep many people from getting lifesaving treatments for HIV, malaria, and other diseases.
Another loss is the scientific collaboration that occurs via the WHO and at about 70 centers it hosts at U.S. institutions such as Columbia University and Johns Hopkins University. Through these networks, scientists share findings despite political feuds between countries.
A commands the secretary of state to ensure the departmentâs programs are âin line with an America First foreign policy.â It follows on the order to pause international aid while reviewing it for âconsistency with United States foreign policy.â That order says that U.S. aid has served âto destabilize world peace by promoting ideas in foreign countries that are directly inverse to harmonious and stable relations.â
These and executive orders on climate policies track with policy agendas expressed by Project 2025. Although Trump and his new administration have distanced themselves from the Heritage Foundation playbook, the work histories of the 38 named primary authors of Project 2025 and found that at least 28 of them worked in Trump's first administration.ĚýOne of Project 2025's chief architects was Russell Vought, who served as director of the Office of Management and Budget during °Ő°ůłÜłžąčâs first term and has been nominated for it again. Multiple contributors to Project 2025 are from the America First Legal Foundation, a group headed by Trump adviser Stephen Miller thatâs filed complaints against âwoke corporations.â
Project 2025 recommends cutting international aid for programs and organizations focused on climate change and reproductive health care, and steering resources toward âstrengthening the fundamentals of free markets,â lowering taxes, and deregulating businesses as a path to economic stability.
Several experts said the executive orders appear to be about ideological rather than strategic positioning.
The White House did not respond to questions about its executive orders on global health. Regarding the executive order saying U.S. aid serves âto destabilize world peace,â a spokesperson at USAID wrote in an email: âWe refer you to the White House.â
Ńîšóĺú´ŤĂ˝Ňîl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFFâan independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .