Hoping the US would reconsider its decision to exit the World Health Organisation, the global health agency said it was looking forward to engaging in constructive dialogue with that country for the benefit of millions of people worldwide.
Soon after he was inaugurated as the 47th president of the United States, Donald Trump signed an executive order withdrawing the US from the WHO, saying the agency had failed in handling the COVID-19 pandemic and other global health crises.
He also accused the WHO of failing to act independently and being overly influenced by political pressures, particularly from China.
Trump criticised the WHO’s response to the pandemic, alleging that the organisation had misled the global community about the origins of the virus and mishandled critical aspects of the early response.
Another significant grievance cited was the issue of financial contributions to the WHO. As the largest financial contributor to the organization, the United States typically provides approximately 18 percent of WHO’s funding.
Trump argued that the US was being unfairly charged higher fees compared to other countries, particularly China, which contributes less despite its larger population.
“World Health ripped us off, everybody rips off the United States. It’s not going to happen anymore,” Trump said after signing the order.
The US president also called for urgent reforms within the WHO, suggesting that the global agency needed to operate more independently from the political pressures of member states.
He framed the withdrawal as a move aimed at pushing for the necessary reforms to make the WHO more effective in addressing global health challenges.
This decision marks a continuation of Trump’s criticism during his previous presidential tenure. He had attempted to exit WHO during his first term.
Also Read: WHO’s new list of 17 priority pathogens which need vaccines
WHO’s response
In a statement, the WHO expressed regret over the United States’ decision to withdraw.
The WHO emphasised its essential role in safeguarding the health and security of people around the world, including Americans.
WHO said its mission involved addressing the root causes of disease, strengthening health systems, and responding to health emergencies—often in challenging environments where other entities may not have the access or resources to operate.
The US has been a founding member of the WHO since its establishment in 1948 and has been instrumental in shaping and governing the organisation alongside 193 other member states, including India.
The WHO highlighted its long-standing partnership with the US, and underscored collaborative achievements such as the eradication of smallpox and the near eradication of polio.
The organisation also noted that over the past seven years, the US had been part of significant reforms aimed at improving WHO’s accountability, cost-effectiveness, and overall impact.
“With the participation of the United States and other Member States, WHO has over the past 7 years implemented the largest set of reforms in its history, to transform our accountability, cost-effectiveness, and impact in countries. This work continues,” WHO said on Tuesday, 21 January.
Also Read: Are mobile phones messing with our minds?
Impact on global health
The withdrawal of the US from the WHO is expected to have profound consequences for global health initiatives.
The US is a key player in funding and coordinating health efforts worldwide, and its absence could significantly disrupt ongoing programs and initiatives, particularly in combating infectious diseases.
One of the most immediate concerns is the impact on global disease control efforts. Experts warned that the US withdrawal could undermine WHO’s ability to coordinate international responses to infectious diseases like malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS.
These diseases would require extensive international cooperation and resources, and the loss of US involvement could compromise efforts to address them.
Moreover, the WHO’s surveillance capabilities and epidemic response initiatives could be weakened without US participation. The US has long been a key partner in global health research and data-sharing, and its absence may hinder WHO’s ability to detect, monitor, and respond to emerging health threats. This could lead to delays in response times to future pandemics, increasing the risk of unchecked disease outbreaks that could spread across borders.
The US is also a significant contributor to humanitarian health efforts, such as the WHO’s $1.5 billion appeal for urgent crises in regions like Afghanistan and Sudan.
With the US withdrawing, these efforts could face considerable setbacks, making it more challenging to address health emergencies in conflict zones or areas affected by natural disasters.
The US withdrawal from the WHO could diminish its influence in shaping global health policies, potentially opening the door for other countries, such as China and Russia, to exert more control over the direction of international health initiatives.
As the US steps back from its leadership role, other nations may step in to fill the void, potentially altering the global health landscape.
Additionally, American scientists and public health experts could face barriers in accessing critical genetic databases and collaborative research networks managed by the WHO.
These databases are essential for developing vaccines, tracking disease trends, and conducting public health research, and losing access to them could hinder the US’s ability to contribute to global health advancements.
The impact of the US withdrawal could extend beyond global health efforts. The US biotech industry, in particular, may experience challenges related to the loss of access to global health data and collaborative research opportunities.
This could slow down innovation in vaccine development and therapeutic research, as companies may find themselves isolated from the vast network of international collaborations that have historically been essential for breakthroughs in public health.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
link
