The recent announcement from Donald Trump in January 2025, of re-withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) comes to the globe both as a surprise and as an expectation. WHO, a specialized agency of the United Nations (UN), was officially established on April 7, 1948, as a result of the World Health Assembly held in Geneva. 61 countries came together to create an organization that focused on the international health crisis.

Trump’s withdrawal from WHO jeopardizes global health efforts, weakening pandemic preparedness and vaccine distribution worldwide.

The creation of this organization was part of broader efforts, connected to the aftermath of WWII, to promote global cooperation. Its focus is improving health, controlling diseases, raising awareness, and providing technical assistance during health crises.

The formation of the WHO marks a significant step toward cooperative global action in health crises. Nonetheless, WHO has played a critical role in addressing major global health crises such as smallpox eradication, polio vaccination campaigns, and its remarkable management of the global response to pandemics like COVID-19.

The withdrawal from WHO by the U.S. under President Donald Trump was first seen in July 2020, when the organization was formally notified of its decision to withdraw. This move had significant implications, not only for global public health but also for countries like Pakistan. Trump’s administration cited dissatisfaction with the WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and its perceived bias towards China as the reason.

Trump’s administration also accused the WHO of mismanaging the COVID-19 response, particularly during the initial spread of the outbreak in China. The U.S. also asserted that the organization had not held China responsible for the virus spread. They also highlighted the inability of WHO to control the virus, which contributed devastation caused by the global pandemic.

However, this decision was part of a broader “America First” foreign policy agenda by Donald Trump, which aimed to reduce U.S. involvement in multilateral organizations. Trump views that these organizations do not align with American interests. Trump aims to reduce American involvement in global affairs. He rather focuses on “making America great again.” This idea reflects the ‘Isolationism’ policy of the U.S. in the 1820s. Moreover, the U.S. gives the rationale of disproportionately funding the organization while receiving little in return. Trump argues that the U.S. is contributing more than any other country to the WHO’s budget.

Pakistan faces critical challenges as U.S. funding for polio eradication and disease control efforts diminishes.

Significant international criticism followed the U.S.’s withdrawal from WHO. Being the largest donor to the organization, the U.S. played a crucial role in funding global health initiatives to counter global crises, such as the distribution of vaccines, epidemic preparedness, and the provision of medical resources to countries in need.

The U.S.’s absence will weaken the organization’s ability to coordinate global health responses, leading to rising concerns that the world will struggle to respond effectively to future pandemics or health emergencies. This will boost the world health crisis.

The withdrawal has immediate and long-term consequences for Pakistan, a country already grappling with significant health challenges. As a member of the WHO, Pakistan has benefited from various programs and initiatives supported by the organization, including polio eradication efforts, maternal and child health services, and disease surveillance.

The U.S. played a major role in financing many of these efforts, and the loss of this funding threatens the continuity and expansion of health programs in Pakistan, including initiatives aimed at combating infectious diseases like tuberculosis, malaria, and polio.

Pakistan remains one of the few countries where polio is endemic. Therefore, the decrease in U.S. support will increase Pakistan’s susceptibility to the spread of polio. Pakistan’s polio eradication campaign has faced significant challenges due to logistical, security, and cultural barriers. The current crisis has to contend with reduced funding from the United States of America. This places Pakistan in a very critical position to combat polio.

Furthermore, one must consider Pakistan’s relationship with China and China’s presence in global affairs after the U.S. withdrawal. As the U.S. sought to reduce its involvement in global organizations, China stepped in to fill the gap, highlighting its presence in the global arena.

China’s growing influence in WHO alters global health diplomacy, impacting Pakistan’s international health cooperation.

China is becoming a more dominant player in the WHO and other international initiatives, replacing the U.S. On the other hand, Pakistan and China’s growing close ties make Pakistan navigate a shifting global health landscape where China’s influence at WHO is on the rise. This alignment with China has positive aspects for Pakistan, as it allows Pakistan to benefit from China’s support in health-related issues.

However, Pakistan finds itself in a challenging position with the U.S., as they are dissatisfied with China’s increasing influence. Admittedly, Pakistan’s healthcare system might face additional strain due to the disruptions in global health partnerships. Pakistan is bound to seek alternative sources of funding and cooperation.

This global shift also made it harder for Pakistan to continue its progress in health-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as WHO’s ability to assist Pakistan in meeting These goals might get weak with WHO’s reduced funds after the U.S. withdrawal. The loss of U.S. support within WHO affected critical public health initiatives, while Pakistan’s position in the shifting geopolitics of global health required a careful recalibration of its diplomatic strategies.

In the long run, the U.S. decision highlighted the interconnectedness of global health and politics. The current situation underscores the significance of multilateral cooperation in tackling global challenges. As the U.S. later rejoined WHO under the Biden administration, the consequences of this withdrawal lingered for countries that rely on global cooperation to strengthen their healthcare systems.

Trump’s isolationist policies continue to disrupt multilateral health initiatives, forcing nations to recalibrate their diplomatic strategies.

Trump’s return to office has once again highlighted the decision to re-withdraw from WHO. The world is yet to witness the implications of the U.S. re-withdrawing. For the first time, the withdrawal from WHO was temporary. However, this time, the decision coincides with the return to the office.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.