President Donald Trump has taken swift action just days into his second term, signing an executive order to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO). The decision, rooted in concerns over China’s significant influence on the organization, has sent shockwaves through global health communities and left the WHO scrambling to address a looming financial shortfall.

The executive order triggers a year-long notification period for the U.S. withdrawal, adhering to the terms established in the 1948 joint resolution that formalized U.S. membership in the WHO. The move effectively eliminates the anticipated $706 million in U.S. contributions for the 2024-2025 budget cycle, accounting for 18% of the WHO’s total revenue. This funding gap has left the organization struggling to maintain its operations and meet global health challenges.

In a surprising turn, Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO’s technical lead on the COVID-19 pandemic, took to social media platform X (formerly Twitter) to rally support. Her post, seeking donations for the WHO Foundation, revealed a $1 billion fundraising goal to offset the financial crisis. As of Friday afternoon, however, only $23,000 had been raised—an amount highlighting the daunting challenge ahead.

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus acknowledged the financial strain in a message to staff, announcing immediate measures to cut costs. These include a hiring freeze for all but the most critical roles and a halt on capital investments. These reductions underscore the organization’s reliance on U.S. funding and the severe impact of its withdrawal.

Trump’s decision has reignited debates about the WHO’s role in global health and its accountability to member states. Critics argue that the organization has failed to adequately address concerns over China’s influence, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Supporters of the withdrawal view it as a necessary step to ensure U.S. resources are allocated to organizations that prioritize transparency and American interests.

The financial implications of the U.S. withdrawal extend beyond budgetary concerns. The WHO has long relied on U.S. contributions to fund essential programs, from vaccine distribution to combating infectious diseases in developing countries. With the loss of American support, the organization faces a critical test in maintaining its mission and credibility on the global stage.

As the WHO grapples with this new reality, Trump’s executive order signals a bold shift in U.S. foreign policy and highlights the administration’s commitment to challenging institutions it deems compromised by foreign influence. The coming months will reveal how the WHO adapts to this financial and political pressure, and whether other nations step up to fill the void left by the United States.

By Justin Sanchez

Born with a copy of "Atlas Shrugged" in hand, Justin showed early signs of his future as a conservative firebrand. Raised in a household where Rush Limbaugh's voice echoed through the halls, Justin was inspired to become a prominent figure in conservative journalism, in which he shares his support of Republican values.