As the United States prepares to officially exit the World Health Organization (WHO) on January 22, 2026, concerns mount over the potential disruption to global health efforts. The decision, stemming from an executive order by President Donald Trump, could have far-reaching implications for the WHO and international public health.
In the meantime, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been instructed to halt all activities and communications with the WHO, exacerbating the potential fallout from the US withdrawal. The timing could be disastrous, especially with the threat of a new pandemic looming.
Rising Health Threats
Already, fears of a human pandemic caused by the H5N1 avian influenza virus have emerged, as outbreaks of bird flu in the US are monitored closely. While the virus has mostly affected livestock, several human cases have been reported, including one fatality. The US’ exit from the WHO will leave a significant gap in both funding and technical expertise, critical not only for addressing urgent health crises but also for long-standing public health initiatives such as polio eradication.
Historically, the US has been the largest contributor to the WHO’s budget, providing $1.28 billion in the 2022-2023 biennial cycle. This contribution accounted for 16.3% of total funding, with Germany a distant second at 10.9%. The loss of US funding would severely impact the organization’s ability to carry out its vital work.
The WHO’s Irreplaceable Role
Despite the US’ departure, experts emphasize that the WHO remains indispensable for global health cooperation. The COVID-19 pandemic reinforced the essential lesson that disease knows no borders, making global collaboration crucial. The WHO’s unique position as a neutral forum allows it to coordinate international responses to health crises, especially through mechanisms such as the International Health Regulations, which require countries to report outbreaks that could affect global health.
Although other organizations, such as UNICEF, Gavi, and the Gates Foundation, play significant roles in global health, none possess the reach or influence of the WHO. The organization’s ability to unify countries around common health policies was instrumental in eradicating smallpox in 1980, with the US and the Soviet Union working together despite the Cold War.
However, with the US pulling back, the WHO may lose some of its authority and influence, especially if the US ramps up alternative multilateral health partnerships.
The Halt of Key Pandemic Negotiations
One critical aspect of the US withdrawal is its impact on negotiations for the WHO Pandemic Agreement. This initiative, aimed at strengthening global preparedness and response to future pandemics, has already encountered significant hurdles. With the US no longer involved, the prospects for reaching a meaningful agreement at the upcoming World Health Assembly in May are uncertain.
Reform and Financial Sustainability
The WHO’s role is not beyond scrutiny. Many, including President Trump, have criticized the organization’s governance, financing, and decision-making processes. These criticisms have spurred recent reforms within the WHO, including changes to its funding model aimed at ensuring long-term financial sustainability. In 2022, member states agreed to gradually increase assessed contributions, with the goal of covering 50% of the core budget by 2030-2031.
However, this change only begins in 2024, and it remains to be seen whether other countries will step in to fill the financial void left by the US. WHO staffers are also exploring innovative solutions, such as the “One Dollar, One World” campaign, aimed at raising $1 billion from 1 billion people, as well as cost-cutting measures.
Can China Fill the Void?
China has historically contributed less than 3% of the WHO’s core budget, despite pledging additional funds during the US funding halt in 2020. Given China’s preference for bilateral aid, particularly through its Health Silk Road initiative, it is unlikely that China will significantly increase its contributions in the short term.
As the WHO faces these financial challenges, smaller nations like Singapore may play an important role in stabilizing global health governance. By increasing their contributions and leveraging expertise in public health and biomedical research, countries like Singapore can support the WHO and advocate for reforms aimed at improving its efficiency.
A Pivotal Moment for Global Health
The US withdrawal from the WHO represents both a crisis and an opportunity. While the disruption caused by the loss of funding and expertise will be felt worldwide, it also presents a chance for the WHO to reform and adapt to new global health challenges. Despite its flaws, the WHO remains the most effective platform for global cooperation in health, and it is vital that nations work together to ensure its success in the coming years.
Related topics
