A 2020 Decision Resurfaces: Trump’s New Push to Exit the World Health Organization
However, the US has established its own plans for "track and trace" in response to biological threats
Donald Trump is planning to withdraw the US from the World Health Organization (WHO) early in his second term
Source: https://www.ft.com/content/e6061ed5-2703-4b8a-9948-a557aaaf52c2
During his first term, Trump moved to withdraw the U.S. from the WHO, citing concerns over its handling of the pandemic and its alleged bias toward China. However, that withdrawal process was halted when President Joe Biden took office in 2021, as he reversed Trump's decision and rejoined the WHO.
Trump’s team want to move much faster this time around after initiating the process immediately. Experts warn of the “catastrophic” impact it would have on global health since the departure would remove the WHO’s biggest source of funds.
What is the WHO - and who funds it?
Founded in 1948 and based in Geneva, Switzerland, it is the UN agency responsible for global public health
Has 194 member states, and aims to "promote health, keep the world safe and serve the vulnerable"
Involved in vaccination campaigns, health emergencies and supporting countries in primary care
Funded by a combination of members' fees based on wealth and population and voluntary contributions
WHO, a captured agency: Bill Gates’ influence
(As part of ESC, I did this research and posted this information in 2022.)
As of 2018, the US was the biggest single donor to the WHO, funding roughly 15% of the WHO's annual budget (1). The US contributed more than $893 million (nearly 22% of the WHO budget) for the latest 2 year budget cycle,10x that of the contribution of China.
UPDATE: In 2022-23, the US was the WHO’s largest single donor, providing about 16 per cent of its funding.
The second-largest funder was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), which provided nearly 12% of the WHO's funds.
The Gates Foundation has pumped more than $5 billion into the WHO since 2000. The BMGF accounts for 45% of WHO’s funding from nongovernmental entities. The BMGF also provides funding to Gavi (the Vaccine Alliance) and Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and Gavi is the third largest contributor ($316.5 M in 2018) to WHO (2).
Given all the monetary donations, how much influence does the Gates foundation have over WHO?
The billionaire was the first private individual to keynote WHO’s general assembly of member countries, and academics have coined a term for his sway in global health: the Bill Chill (3).
If the billionaire behind the BMGF called the WHO director-general, he “would likely be on the next plane to Seattle,” Gostin said, referencing the foundation’s headquarters. “He is treated liked a head of state, not only at the WHO, but also at the G20,” a Geneva-based NGO representative said, calling Gates one of the most influential men in global health (4).
Because the Gates foundation is such an influential funder of WHO and other global health institutions, this leaves little funding for other health programs making it difficult for WHO to carry out its public health mission of putting people’s health interests first (5).
“Most of the funding Gates provides to the WHO is tied to specific agendas of the foundation. That means that the WHO cannot itself set global health priorities, and it is beholden to a largely unaccountable private actor. Unlike states, the Gates Foundation has little democratic accountability,” says Lawrence Gostin, Faculty Director of the O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at Georgetown University in the US (6).
US Plan to circumvent the WHO International Health Regulations (IHR)
Amendments to the WHO International Health Regulations and the Pandemic Treaty that were adopted in June 2024 have raised concerns among critics. These agreements are seen as expanding the WHO’s powers during health emergencies and could shift the focus of global health governance toward centralized authority and cooperation.
However, the US has established its own version of “track and trace” to circumvent the WHO IHR.
In April 2024, the Biden administration announced new partnerships with 50 countries to stifle future pandemics (7, 8). The strategy will help “prevent, detect and effectively respond to biological threats wherever they emerge,” Biden said in a statement.
The plan has 5 goals and objectives:
GOAL 1: Enable risk awareness and detection to inform decision-making across the biodefense enterprise.
GOAL 2: Ensure biodefense enterprise capabilities to prevent bioincidents.
GOAL 3: Ensure biodefense enterprise preparedness to reduce the impacts of bioincidents.
GOAL 4: Rapidly respond to limit the impacts of bioincidents.
GOAL 5: Facilitate recovery to restore the community, the economy, and the environment after a bioincident.
The term "bioincident" has raised eyebrows, as it could be interpreted to include both natural and man-made biological events, such as pandemics and biological warfare. The strategy places emphasis on biodefense, which could be seen as a parallel or alternative framework to the WHO's authority over health emergencies, especially in terms of international coordination, surveillance, and governance.
Ultimately, the balance between national interests in biodefense and the need for global health collaboration will be crucial in determining the effectiveness and equity of future health emergency responses.
Leave a comment and let me know what you think about the US withdrawing from the WHO. Will it make a difference in how outbreaks are handled in the US? Are you concerned about Gates filling the void at the WHO once the US withdraws?
Sources:
I'm happy when the U.S., or any country for that matter, exits the WHO. I'm still concerned about any aggressive efforts that might be made to identify and respond to 'pathogens.' We've always had those, but now it's a global business run by people who make more money when people get sicker. They make money when they find 'pathogens,' and have and incentive to pretend they've found them, or create them, so they are easier to find I don't trust anyone to control any of that; not Trump's team or any other. Bodily automony for people, animals and plants!
I have been concerned about Gates' influence over world "health," and over sovereign nations' willingness to hand over autonomy to the WHO's decisions. Maybe withdrawal has more impact than a listless hand-waving over policies.