Why in the News?

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization (WHO).

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Background (Context of the Article)
• About the Withdrawal (Reasons, Implications, Consequences for US, Challenges for WHO, etc.)

Background:

• President Donald Trump signed an executive order to withdraw the United States from the WHO.
• This decision marks the second attempt by Trump to exit the global health body, citing dissatisfaction with WHO’s management during the COVID-19 pandemic, perceived political biases, and disproportionate financial burdens placed on the U.S.
• Trump had initially announced a withdrawal during his first term in 2020. However, this was reversed by then-President Joe Biden in 2021.
• The new executive order revives the debate, calling into question the role of the U.S. in global health diplomacy and its commitment to multilateralism.

Key Reasons for the Withdrawal:

• Mishandling of the COVID-19 Pandemic:
  • Trump criticized WHO’s delayed response to the pandemic and its handling of China's accountability in the initial stages of the outbreak.
• Perceived Political Bias:
  • The administration accused WHO of being overly influenced by certain member states, including China.
• Financial Burden:
  • The U.S. contributes the highest assessed membership dues, ranging between $100 to $122 million annually, and nearly $1.3 billion in voluntary funding in 2022-2023.
  • Trump labelled this burden “unfair” when compared to China’s significantly lower contributions.

Immediate Actions Outlined in the Executive Order:

• Halt in U.S. Funding: Immediate cessation of all financial transfers to WHO.
• Personnel Withdrawal: Recall of U.S. government employees working with WHO.
• Development of Alternatives: Identification of credible domestic and international partners to replace WHO’s functions.
• Pandemic Treaty Exit: Discontinuation of negotiations on the WHO’s pandemic treaty, a framework aimed at improving global pandemic responses.

Implications of the Withdrawal:

• Financial Strain on WHO:
  • The U.S. contributes nearly 20% of WHO’s funding. Losing this would severely impact the organization’s ability to support health programs, including vaccine development, eradication of diseases like polio, and pandemic preparedness.
• Program Disruptions in Developing Nations:
  • WHO aids various global health programs, including India's immunization and disease surveillance efforts. Reduced funding could hinder these initiatives, particularly in low-resource countries.
• Loss of Expertise:
  • The withdrawal would sever collaboration between WHO and U.S. institutions like the CDC, which are instrumental in global health surveillance and response.

Domestic Consequences:

• Limited Access to Global Health Data:
  • The U.S. would lose access to critical information on emerging infectious diseases, potentially leaving the country vulnerable to new health threats.
• Vaccine Preparedness:
  • Exiting the WHO could impact access to influenza strain samples, essential for producing effective vaccines, leading to increased hospitalizations and deaths from preventable diseases like the flu.
• Reduced Influence in Global Health Policy:
  • By withdrawing, the U.S. would relinquish its leadership role, creating a vacuum likely to be filled by countries like China. This shift could reduce America’s diplomatic leverage in international health.

Geopolitical Shifts and the Role of Emerging Economies:

• The S. withdrawal may pave the way for greater involvement from China and the Global South, including India.
• China has already pledged $30 million in additional funding to WHO, a move likely to strengthen its influence in global health governance.
• Experts suggest this is an opportunity for India and other emerging economies to step up.
• India’s leadership in vaccine production and its positioning as the "voice of the Global South" can play a pivotal role in shaping a balanced global health framework.

Challenges for WHO:

• WHO faces significant internal criticisms, including slow responses to health crises and inefficiencies in implementing reforms.
• While funding cuts may exacerbate these issues, experts argue that constructive engagement rather than withdrawal is a better strategy to drive meaningful reform within the organization.

Way Forward:

• Judicial Clarity:
  • Legal experts question the constitutionality of Trump’s decision, suggesting Congressional approval may be required for withdrawal.
• Reforming WHO:
  • WHO must address inefficiencies, improve transparency, and speed up emergency response protocols to regain trust and maintain global health leadership.
• Strengthened Collaboration with Emerging Economies:
  • Nations like India and South Africa should collaborate to fill the financial and strategic gap left by the U.S. withdrawal.