U.S. Withdrawal from WHO Initiated by Trump

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to start the process of withdrawing the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), the UN agency responsible for global health initiatives. Last week, he finalized this decision, cutting off all funding and support.

This move didn’t come out of nowhere. In 2020, Trump expressed concerns about the WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, citing its failure to respond adequately and its reluctance to reform.

In light of recent findings, the president’s choice seems justified.

During the pandemic, the WHO struggled to fulfill its critical role. After a thorough two-year inquiry into the government’s pandemic response, including testimonies, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic noted:

While meant to support global health, the WHO appeared overly concerned with its relationship with the Chinese Communist Party during the COVID-19 crisis. The organization, sometimes misled, lacked access to China and allowed itself to be used by the CCP. Instead of prioritizing all member nations, the WHO’s actions indicated a political bias.

To illustrate, on January 14, 2020, the WHO incorrectly claimed COVID-19 was “not transmissible” between humans—a statement based on misinformation from Chinese officials. This was a significant oversight. The coronavirus had already started to spread by then, perhaps as early as fall 2019, and traces even appeared in blood samples in Italy.

On December 31, 2019, WHO ignored early warnings from Taiwan about unusual pneumonia cases in Wuhan, while the Chinese government downplayed the situation and suppressed dissenting voices. They even ensured that air travel continued to flow from China to the U.S.

Typically, in a scenario like this, the WHO should declare a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern” (PHEIC) to alert nations and prepare them—essentially a global “red alert” for a health risk.

Evidence shows intelligence agencies from both the U.S. and Germany reported that the CCP pressured WHO officials not to declare an emergency, threatening to withdraw China from international health efforts. Consequently, the WHO delayed announcing the emergency until January 30, 2020, by which point nearly 10,000 people had been infected, and the virus had spread to 19 countries. This delay was attributed to the CCP’s influence.

Moreover, while praising China’s domestic efforts to manage the virus, the WHO opposed imposing travel restrictions. Between late December and January, over 430,000 passengers traveled from China to the U.S.

Trump put a travel ban in place on January 31, 2020. Dr. Anthony Fauci recognized that this decision likely saved lives, yet critics labeled it as “racism.”

Things took another turn in January 2021 when WHO sent a team to Wuhan to investigate the origins of the COVID-19 outbreak. However, Chinese officials barred American scientists from joining the team, except for one who had previously collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology on U.S.-funded research.

Remarkably, the team was significantly limited in their investigation; they faced restrictions on data access and interactions with local scientists. They were quarantined for two weeks and had limited contact outside their hotel, hindering informal discussions that could have provided valuable insights.

The investigation’s conclusions seemed farcical. Here, they proposed various transmission scenarios but dismissed a lab-based origin as “extremely unlikely.” Essentially, they aligned with the Chinese government’s narrative.

In the grand scheme of funding, while China’s contributions to the WHO are relatively small, the U.S. has been the leading benefactor, offering between $110 to $123 million annually from 2014 to 2023. The organization also receives voluntary funding from entities such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

As California announces its involvement with the WHO’s network following the U.S. exit, it appears officials within the organization are pleased. Governor Gavin Newsom made the announcement while attending a global health meeting in Switzerland.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been tasked with finding international partners for collaboration on global health.

The WHO’s past failures during the pandemic indicate a pressing need for a new, more effective international approach to handling health crises. In the U.K., for instance, conservative leaders have introduced a campaign titled “Action on World Health” aimed at reforming or replacing the WHO.

Our allies recognize that there is room for significant improvement in how we collectively address global health risks.