The United States has officially withdrawn from the World Health Organization (WHO), ending decades of participation in the world’s foremost global health body. According to Reuters, the decision was confirmed by U.S. health and foreign affairs departments, signaling a full disengagement that includes halting financial contributions and future collaboration.
Government officials cited dissatisfaction with WHO’s handling of global health emergencies and claimed the agency failed to meet expectations during recent crises. A senior health official stated that the U.S. would not seek observer status or rejoin in the future, choosing instead to work directly with individual countries on public health matters such as disease surveillance and response coordination.
Financial Fallout and Operational Disruptions
Historically the largest contributor to WHO’s budget, the U.S. accounted for around 18% of its total funding. The sudden departure has forced the agency to make significant cuts, including a plan to reduce staffing by nearly 25% and scale back numerous health programs. These changes could have a ripple effect on global health efforts, particularly in low-income nations that rely on WHO support for vaccination drives, epidemic response, and technical expertise.
There is also an ongoing legal dispute over whether the U.S. must pay an estimated $260 million in outstanding dues before its departure is finalized. The State Department insists there is no such obligation, while critics argue the move violates U.S. law.
Public Health Experts and Global Leaders React
Health experts have raised alarms about the long-term consequences of the U.S. exit. Kelly Henning, public health program lead at Bloomberg Philanthropies, warned that leaving WHO could erode the international frameworks necessary to detect and combat pandemics.
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Bill Gates—chair of the Gates Foundation, a major global health funder—emphasized the importance of WHO’s role in international health coordination.
“The world needs the World Health Organization,” Gates told Reuters, expressing hope that the U.S. might eventually reconsider its decision.
The move also threatens to deepen a leadership vacuum in global health, at a time when multilateral cooperation is more essential than ever.
A Shift in Global Health Diplomacy
As WHO faces immediate financial strain and reduced operational capacity, other member states may need to increase their support or reimagine the structure of global health governance. Some analysts fear that the decision could embolden further withdrawals or weaken the resolve of global collaboration.
While U.S. officials maintain the move is in the country’s best interest, the consequences could stretch far beyond domestic borders. Reduced coordination, fragmented response strategies, and fewer shared resources could leave the world more vulnerable to emerging health threats.
The departure sends a strong message about changing international priorities and the growing tension between nationalism and multilateralism. Whether this marks a temporary shift or a lasting realignment in global health remains to be seen.
