EO 14155: Withdrawing The United States From The World Health Organization

TLDR

This executive order withdraws the U.S. from the WHO, citing pandemic mishandling, lack of reforms, and excessive U.S. financial contributions. It halts WHO funding, reassigns personnel, stops participation in WHO negotiations, and directs agencies to find alternative global health partners.

Executive Order 14155 formally withdraws the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO).

The order cites the WHO’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic, its failure to implement necessary reforms, and its perceived lack of independence from political influence, particularly from China. It also highlights the disproportionate financial contributions the U.S. makes to the WHO compared to other nations, such as China. The order revokes previous actions that retracted the U.S. withdrawal notice from 2020 and directs federal agencies to cease funding, reassign personnel, and identify alternative partners for global health activities. Additionally, it halts U.S. participation in WHO-related negotiations, such as the Pandemic Agreement and amendments to the International Health Regulations.

Issues

1. Claim: WHO’s Mishandling of the COVID-19 Pandemic

   • Debunking: While the WHO faced criticism during the pandemic, its role is primarily advisory, and it lacks enforcement power over member states. The organization relied on information provided by member countries, including China, which initially downplayed the severity of the outbreak. Blaming the WHO alone for the pandemic’s global spread ignores the shared responsibility of nations to respond effectively and transparently. The U.S. itself faced significant challenges in managing the pandemic, including delayed testing and inconsistent public health messaging.

2. Claim: Unfair Financial Contributions

   • Debunking: The U.S. contributes more to the WHO than other nations because it has historically chosen to do so, reflecting its leadership role in global health. While China’s contributions are lower relative to its population, this is a function of the WHO’s funding structure, which is based on a combination of assessed contributions (mandatory payments based on GDP) and voluntary contributions. The U.S. could have advocated for reforms to the funding model rather than withdrawing entirely.

3. Claim: Lack of Independence from Political Influence

   • Debunking: The WHO operates as an intergovernmental organization, meaning its decisions are influenced by its member states, including the U.S. Withdrawing from the WHO removes the U.S. from the table, reducing its ability to advocate for reforms or counterbalance the influence of other nations like China. This move could cede global health leadership to other countries, undermining U.S. interests.

4. Claim: Revoking Executive Order 13987 (COVID-19 Response)

   • Debunking: Revoking this order, which aimed to organize a unified federal response to COVID-19 and strengthen global health security, could weaken the U.S.'s ability to respond to future pandemics. The order also directs the replacement of the 2024 U.S. Global Health Security Strategy, but without a clear alternative, this could create a policy vacuum.

5. Claim: Identifying Alternative Partners

   • Debunking: While the order calls for identifying alternative partners, no single organization can replicate the WHO’s global reach and expertise. The WHO plays a critical role in coordinating international responses to health crises, tracking disease outbreaks, and setting global health standards. Creating new partnerships or mechanisms will take time and resources, potentially leaving the U.S. and the world more vulnerable in the interim.

6. Claim: Halting Negotiations on Pandemic Agreements

   • Debunking: Withdrawing from negotiations on the WHO Pandemic Agreement and International Health Regulations undermines global efforts to prevent and respond to future pandemics. These agreements aim to improve transparency, data sharing, and coordinated responses, which are essential for addressing global health threats. The U.S. withdrawal could weaken these efforts and isolate the country from critical international collaborations.

This executive order reflects a unilateral approach to global health that prioritizes disengagement over reform. While the WHO is not without flaws, withdrawing from the organization undermines U.S. leadership in global health and weakens international efforts to address pandemics and other health crises. The order’s focus on financial contributions and political influence overlooks the broader benefits of multilateral cooperation and the risks of ceding influence to other nations. Instead of withdrawal, the U.S. could have pursued reforms within the WHO to address its concerns while maintaining its leadership role in global health.

ACTIONS

• 2025-01-27: The CDC has been ordered to immediately stop working with the World Health Organization (WHO) (Archive Link) with expectations of an extended withdrawal.

REFERENCES

• 2025-01-30: President Trump wants an alternative to the World Health Organization: how should we respond? (BMJ 2025;388:r188)