For decades, the United States has gained considerable power to determine the direction of global health policies and programs. Health policy experts say President Donald Trump issued three executive orders on his first day that could indicate the end of the period.
Trump’s ruling on withdrawing from the World Health Organization means that the United States will not be on the table in February when the WHO’s executive board will come to the next meeting. The WHO has the form of its members: 194 countries that set health priorities and agree on important data, treatment and vaccine sharing during the international emergency. With the disappearance of the United States, it will force others.
“The WHO will withdraw from leaving global health -led differences, which will be filled by China,” said Kenneth Bernard, a visiting fellow at Stanford University during the George W. Bush administration. “[This] Clearly, America is not in the best interests.
Executive orders refer to the WHO to withdraw from the WHO and review the US approach to international aid to “Covid 19 Poetry Diseases” and say US aid is “destabilizing global peace” Works for In practice, they echo the priorities set in the “Mandate for Leadership” of the project 2025, which is a Conservative policy blueprint of the Heritage Foundation.
The 922 -page report states that the United States should “be” ready “to withdraw from the WHO, citing” apparent failure “, and a rehabilitation for international aid in the Department of State has been advised –
It says, “The Biden administration treated the agency as a global platform to follow a divisive political and cultural agenda by abortion, climate extremism, gender radicalism, and The interference against the outgoing systemic racism has promoted. “
As one of the world’s largest health caregivers – through both international and national agencies, such as WHO and US Agency for International Development (USAID) – US recovery efforts Can reduce efforts to reduce and reduce efforts to cope with minimal outbreaks, especially in low, especially in lower, especially in lower, sources of doing so Without Income Countries.
“It not only protects Americans less safer, but it also makes citizens less secure,” said Tom Balli, director of the World Health at the Council for Foreign Relations.
“The United States cannot refrain from international health risks,” he added. “Most of the evidence around the travel ban indicate that they provide a false sense of security and engage in taking steps to take the Nations as a domestic to ensure their safety. “
Less than 0.1 % of US GDP
Technically, countries cannot withdraw from the WHO for a year after government notice. But Trump’s executive order cited the notice of his elimination from 2020. If the Congress or the people withdraw, the administration can argue that more than a year has passed.
Trump suspended funds to WHO in 2020, a move that does not require Congress approval. Falling behind the Germany and the Gates Foundation, during the first year of Covade 19 pandemic diseases, the US partnership in the agency earned $ 163 million. Former President Joe Biden restored US membership and payments. In 2023, Malik gave WHO 1 481m.
By 2024, the Biden administration initially paid 2024-25 liabilities, which will cover some of this year’s payments this year, said Global Health Center, co-director of the Global Health Center at the Geneva Graduate Institute.
In the executive order, “unfair payments” have been described as one of the reasons for withdrawing from the WHO. The dues of the countries are one percent of their total domestic products (GDP), which means that as the richest nation in the world, the United States has paid more prices than other countries.
Funds for the WHO represent about 4 % of the US budget for global health, which in turn is less than 0.1 percent each year in US federal spending. For about $ 3.4 billion, WHO’s budget is about one -third of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which received $ 9.3 billion in basic funding in 2023.
WHO funds support programs for the prevention and treatment of polio, tuberculosis, HIV, malaria, measles and other diseases, especially in countries that provide health care as a domestic Struggle to do. It also responds to the emergency health conditions in conflict areas, in which the US government does not work – in parts of Gaza, Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo, among others.
In January 2020, the WHO informed the world about the danger of spreading the Coid by giving the world its high alarm: an emergency of a public health health condition. In the next two years, he reviewed diagnostic tests and potential drugs for Coid, updated the public regularly, and advised citizens to protect citizens.
Experts have cited memories in the agency, but numerous analyzes suggest that internal problems have the highest rate of world death for the United States due to Coid.
“All countries were informed of the January 30 WHO about the emergency health conditions about international concern,” Bulki said. “South Korea, Taiwan, and others responded aggressively – America did not do so.”
‘It’s a red herring’
However, Trump’s executive order accused the WHO of “wrong” and “immediately failed to adopt the desired reforms”. The WHO has made some changes through bureaucratic processes, including inputs from the partners. Last year, for example, the organization approved several amendments to its health emergency rules. These include provisions for transparent reporting and integrated financing.
“If the Trump administration tried to make special reforms for a year and then disappointed, I could find the line of reforms reliable,” said Moon, a Geneva Graduate Institute, said. “But to me, it’s a red herring.”
“I don’t buy specifications,” said Bernard of Stanford University. He added, “This is not a problem of money.” With China’s problems, which makes sense, there is no belief in withdrawing. “
Trump has accused him of failing to investigate China’s origin, which he presents as a “inappropriate political influence” in the executive order.
“The World Health Organization covered every step of the Chinese Communist Party,” Trump said in a video published on social media in 2023.
On several occasions, the WHO has called for transparency from China. The agency does not have the legal authority to force China, or any other country. The fact also rejects Trump’s warnings that a pandemic agreement under the negotiations in the WHO is based on US sovereignty. In fact, the purpose of the agreement is to explain how countries can cooperate better in the next epidemic disease.
Trump’s Executive Order calls on the United States to “stop negotiations” on the pandemity agreement. This means that the pharmaceutical industry can lose one of its strict guards as debates move forward.
So far, the United States and the European Union have supported lobbying from the pharmaceutical industry to maintain patent rights over medicines and vaccines. He has opposed the efforts of the middle -income countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America to include licensing agreements, which will allow more companies to develop drugs and vaccines when a crisis is reduced. – A study published in the Nature Medicine Journal estimates that more than one million lives could be saved worldwide in 2021.
“Once the United States is absent – for better and worse – some positions will be less pressure,” said Moon. “In negotiations with the pandemic agreement, we can see the weak opposition to the maximum health -based approach to intellectual property.”
“This is a moment of geographical political change as the United States is making itself less relevant,” said Evood Elkija, chair of the African Union vaccine delivery alliance.
With emerging economies, countries in Asia and Africa can now put more money in the WHO, change policies, and set the agendas that the United States and European countries oppose, Tho who suffer from war in Ukraine. “Power is changing hands,” said Alkija. “It may give us a more equal and better world in a long time.”
Project 2025 echoes
However, in the near future, the WHO is unlikely to completely meet its losses. US funds usually account for about 15 % of its budget. With Trump’s executive order, which stops international aid for 90 days, a lack of money can prevent many people from life -saving treatment for HIV, malaria and other diseases.
Another disadvantage is that there is scientific support that is hosted at US institutions like Columbia University and John Hopkins University and in about 70 centers. Through these networks, scientists share the consequences despite political conflicts.
A third executive order orders the Foreign Secretary to ensure that the department’s program “is in accordance with the US’s first foreign policy”. It is on the order to stop international aid by reviewing it for the “consistency with the United States Foreign Policy”. The order says US aid has “worked to destabilize global peace by promoting ideas in foreign countries that are directly upsetting for harmony and stable relations”.
These and the Executive Orders regarding climate policies detect the policy agendas expressed by Project 2025. Although Trump and his new administration have removed themselves from the Heritage Foundation Playbok, CBS News reviewed the work history of 38 nominated primary writers of Project 2025 and found that at least 28 of them He worked in the first administration.
One of the Chief Architects of the Project 2025 was Russell vote, which served as Director of the Office of Management and Budget during Trump’s first term and was re -nominated for it. The projects are from the First Legal Foundation, a number of assistants in 2025, led by Trump’s adviser Stephen Miller, who lodged complaints against “Voke Corporations”.
Project 2025 recommends a reduction in international aid for programs and organizations focusing on climate change and reproductive health care, and “strengthen the basic principles of free markets”, reducing taxes , And steering resources towards immoral business as a way of economic stability.
Many experts say the executive order appears to be about theoretical rather than strategic positioning.
The White House did not answer questions about its executive orders on global health care. Saying about the executive order, a USAID spokesperson wrote in an email: “We hand you to the White House.”
