The WHO, for which it is known since its inception in 1948, will provide lower-quality services as a result of the US withdrawal. According to public health circles, India should be prepared to invest more in pandemic preparedness, TB, AIDS, pathogen, and antibiotic resistance surveillance, among other programs. President Donald Trump announced that he is separating the US from the World Health Organization.
The U.S. withdrawal has strained the World Health Organization’s finances. The U.S. was the largest donor to the World Health Organization’s budget, accounting for 13% of voluntary contributions and 22.5% of assessed contributions in 2023. The sudden stop of funding created a huge resource gap, threatening critical health initiatives, especially in low- and middle-income countries (L&M).
The U.S. played a key role in contributing scientific knowledge to World Health Organization committees through organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The withdrawal severed partnerships essential to global surveillance and pandemic preparedness. U.S. efforts to create a single worldwide framework for pandemic preparedness, fair vaccine distribution, and response coordination were hampered by its decision to exit the World Health Organization-led pandemic treaty negotiations. Because the withdrawal put national interests ahead of international solidarity, it undermined multilateralism.
Other countries may do the same, undermining trust in global organizations such as the World Health Organization. The first impact on global health governance is a shift in the balance of power. The US exit allowed China and the global South to fill the gap. As China expanded its resources and influence, countries like India became more vocal about low- and middle-income countries and promoted fair health policies. Vulnerable populations in low- and middle-income countries were disproportionately affected by the World Health Organization’s reduced capacity to support vaccination programs and disease elimination initiatives.
The end of the U.S.-World Health Organization partnership delayed the dissemination of critical research and innovations and interfered with international epidemic surveillance networks. There is an opportunity for India and other global South countries to have greater influence on the restructuring of global health governance. India is positioned as a key player due to its leadership in vaccine diplomacy and overall health initiatives. However, its ability to assume the leadership role left by the United States is hampered by a lack of resources and conflicting priorities, such as regional conflicts.
As long as the government allows, the World Health Organization participates in national health initiatives. Additionally, it collaborates with and supports many health initiatives run by the Indian government, including those on HIV, malaria, tuberculosis, neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), antimicrobial resistance, and more.
The World Health Organization is vital to India’s vaccination program; WHO teams also monitor vaccine coverage. If US funding stops, the World Health Organization will be unable to carry out these initiatives, including in India. The US will no longer play a key role in influencing international health policy. Today, the United States uses public health diplomacy to influence how the rest of the world responds to and protects people’s health. Many Eastern European countries, including Albania, Bulgaria, Belarus, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Ukraine, as well as the Soviet Union, declared their intention to withdraw from the World Health Organization in 1949. These countries expressed their displeasure with the World Health Organization’s efforts and the US’s influence over them. A critical moment in the governance of global health was marked by Trump’s withdrawal from the World Health Organization. To guarantee health security and resilience globally, countries like India and other members of the Global South must take the initiative to address these issues and promote a fair and collaborative framework. Bringing the US back in. Restoring stability and trust in the governance of global health still depends on partnerships.
Why is it important for the United States to bid farewell? First, Trump is right: The United States is the largest financial supporter of the World Health Organization (WHO), providing about 18% of its total funding. Withdrawing these funds would have a significant impact on many global health initiatives, such as efforts to eradicate tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, and certain infectious diseases.
The WHO also works to prevent and detect disease outbreaks, build strong health systems, and guarantee that everyone in the world has fair access to lifesaving medicines. Trump’s annoyance makes it clear that strict postures and physical boundaries cannot keep germs out of one’s territory and that global health efforts do not work in a vacuum. The COVID-19 pandemic has taught us that no one is safe until everyone is safe.
The World Health Organization has approached the US in the hopes that he will change his mind and join them again. As amazing as this may sound, scientific miracles have also impacted the medical field, and the medical community is hopeful that another miracle will reconnect the United States with the World Health Organization.