The World Health Organization (WHO) has formally acknowledged the United States’ notification of its intention to withdraw from the multilateral health body, expressing profound regret over a decision that carries significant implications for both American and global public health security. This development marks a pivotal moment for international cooperation in health, given the United States’ historical role as a foundational member and substantial contributor to the WHO’s mandate since its inception. The formal notification sets in motion a series of procedural considerations within the WHO’s governance structures, with the matter slated for discussion by the Executive Board at its forthcoming session in February and subsequently by the World Health Assembly during its annual gathering in May 2026.
For decades, the United States has been an indispensable partner in the WHO’s monumental efforts to combat disease and improve health outcomes worldwide. As a signatory to the WHO Constitution in 1948, the U.S. played a crucial role in shaping the organization’s foundational principles and operational framework. Its contributions have spanned a vast array of global health initiatives, providing not only substantial financial backing but also invaluable scientific expertise, research capabilities, and diplomatic leadership. Iconic successes such as the global eradication of smallpox, a triumph of coordinated international public health, stand as a testament to this collaborative spirit. Beyond smallpox, American support has been instrumental in making significant strides against other widespread public health threats, including the relentless fight against polio, the complex challenges of HIV/AIDS through initiatives like PEPFAR, and rapid responses to emerging infectious diseases such as Ebola and influenza. Further contributions have addressed tuberculosis, malaria, neglected tropical diseases, the escalating crisis of antimicrobial resistance, and the critical domain of food safety, showcasing a comprehensive engagement across the spectrum of global health priorities.
The WHO’s expressed regret regarding the U.S. notification is rooted in a fundamental belief that such a disengagement poses considerable risks. From the perspective of the organization, the absence of the United States—a major economic and scientific power—would inevitably diminish the collective capacity to respond to health crises, weaken global health security architectures, and potentially undermine the financial stability and operational reach of the WHO itself. This perceived weakening of the global health framework is seen as making both the withdrawing nation and the wider world less resilient in the face of existing and future health challenges, underscoring the interconnectedness of health outcomes in an increasingly globalized world. The procedural aspects of the withdrawal, including the formal consideration by the Executive Board and the World Health Assembly, will delve into the intricate legal and operational ramifications of such a move, potentially addressing matters of outstanding financial obligations, the reallocation of resources, and the continuity of programs that have historically benefited from U.S. involvement.
The decision by the United States to signal its withdrawal was accompanied by a series of public statements outlining specific grievances against the WHO. These criticisms included allegations that the organization had "trashed and tarnished" its reputation, insulted the U.S., and compromised its independence. More pointedly, the U.S. cited "WHO failures during the COVID-19 pandemic" as a primary justification, accusing the body of "obstructing the timely and accurate sharing of critical information" and of having "concealed those failures." Additionally, concerns were raised that the WHO had "pursued a politicized, bureaucratic agenda driven by nations hostile to American interests."
In response to these serious accusations, the WHO has consistently and firmly defended its conduct and principles. The organization vehemently refutes claims of partiality or being influenced by any particular national agenda. As a specialized agency of the United Nations, governed by its 194 Member States, the WHO asserts its role as an impartial technical body committed to serving the health interests of all countries without fear or favor. Its mandate is fundamentally non-political, focused on scientific evidence, public health best practices, and international cooperation. The WHO maintains that its engagement with every Member State, including the United States, has consistently been conducted in good faith and with full respect for national sovereignty, adhering strictly to its constitutional mandate to promote global health.
Regarding the specific criticisms related to its performance during the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO has robustly stood by its comprehensive response to what it describes as an unprecedented global health crisis. While acknowledging that no organization or government navigated the complexities of the pandemic perfectly, the WHO asserts that it acted with speed, transparency, and an unwavering commitment to public health. The organization has provided a detailed timeline of its early actions, highlighting its rapid engagement from the moment the first reports of a cluster of "pneumonia of unknown cause" emerged from Wuhan, China, on December 31, 2019. Immediately upon receiving this information, the WHO initiated its emergency incident management system and sought further details from China. By January 11, 2020, even before the first reported death outside China, the organization had already issued global alerts through formal channels, public statements, and social media, convened international experts, and published extensive guidance for countries on safeguarding their populations and health systems.
A critical juncture in the WHO’s early pandemic response was the declaration of COVID-19 as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) under the International Health Regulations (IHR) on January 30, 2020. This designation represents the highest level of alarm under international health law and serves as a global call to action. At the time of this declaration, there were fewer than 100 reported cases of COVID-19 outside of China and no reported deaths, underscoring the WHO’s proactive stance in alerting the world before widespread international transmission. Throughout the initial weeks and months of the pandemic, the WHO Director-General repeatedly urged countries to take immediate and decisive action, issuing stark warnings that "the window of opportunity is closing," emphasizing that "this is not a drill," and categorizing COVID-19 as "public enemy number one." These urgent appeals were aimed at galvanizing governments and populations to implement protective measures, prepare healthcare systems, and mitigate the spread of the novel coronavirus.
The WHO’s approach throughout the pandemic was to provide evidence-based recommendations, advocating for measures such as the use of masks, vaccination, and physical distancing. However, it consistently maintained that decisions regarding mandates for masks, vaccines, or lockdowns rested with sovereign governments, respecting their autonomy to implement policies best suited to their national contexts and populations. This distinction between scientific guidance and national policy implementation is a cornerstone of the WHO’s operational philosophy, reflecting its role as an advisory body rather than a prescriptive authority.
In the aftermath of the pandemic, and in response to numerous independent reviews of the global response, including assessments of its own performance, the WHO has actively undertaken comprehensive reforms to strengthen its internal operations and to bolster countries’ pandemic preparedness and response capabilities. These efforts reflect a commitment to continuous improvement and adaptation in the face of evolving global health threats. The systems and protocols developed and managed by the WHO before, during, and after the emergency phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, operating continuously, have played a vital role in safeguarding all nations, including the United States, by facilitating information sharing, coordinating research, and providing technical support.
The backdrop to this withdrawal notification is a broader period of intensified scrutiny and challenges to multilateral institutions globally. The WHO, as a linchpin of global health governance, operates within a complex geopolitical landscape where national interests can sometimes diverge from collective global health objectives. However, the organization maintains that its existence and effectiveness are predicated on the principle that health security is a shared responsibility, and that a robust, impartial, and well-resourced WHO is indispensable for tackling interconnected health threats that transcend national borders. The inherent impartiality of the WHO, governed by the collective will of its 194 Member States, is presented as its strength, allowing it to convene diverse stakeholders and facilitate consensus on critical global health issues.
Despite the announced departure of a founding member, the WHO continues its unwavering commitment to its core mission and constitutional mandate: the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health as a fundamental human right. This commitment is evidenced by ongoing collaborative efforts among its remaining Member States. Notably, last year saw the adoption of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, a landmark instrument of international law designed to enhance global preparedness and response for future pandemics. This agreement, once ratified, aims to foster greater equity, transparency, and solidarity in global health emergencies. Furthermore, Member States are actively negotiating an annex to this agreement, the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing system, which seeks to promote the rapid detection and sharing of pathogens with pandemic potential, alongside ensuring equitable and timely access to vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics for all nations. These initiatives underscore the continued dedication of the international community to strengthening multilateral health frameworks, even as the landscape of global health diplomacy undergoes significant shifts.
The WHO expresses hope that, in due course, the United States will reconsider its position and resume active participation within the organization. In the interim, the WHO remains steadfast in its resolve to collaborate with all countries, leveraging its technical expertise and global convening power, to address the world’s most pressing health challenges, encompassing both communicable and non-communicable diseases, and to advance its foundational goal of health for all.
About the Author
