On the day of his second inauguration, President Trump announced his intent to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO). His executive order justified the decision based on the organization’s alleged “mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic” and “its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms.” The Trump administration also said it viewed WHO budget demands placed on the United States as disproportionate, arguing that WHO was asking China to contribute too little. Most observers assess the withdrawal as requiring additional congressional action before it can be completed.
To consider the consequences of the potential U.S. withdrawal from WHO, Good Authority editor Christopher Clary chatted with Catherine Worsnop, an assistant professor in the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland-College Park. Worsnop’s work focuses on the WHO and international cooperation in global health. Their chat, lightly edited for clarity and length, is below.
Christopher Clary: Why is there a World Health Organization in the first place? What are its biggest accomplishments, in your view?
Catherine Worsnop: The World Health Organization was founded in 1948 as a specialized agency of the United Nations to “act as the directing and coordinating authority on international health work” with an objective of “the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health.” WHO works in many areas and its accomplishments range from helping to eradicate smallpox to coordinating the only global agreement on tobacco control and enabling the development of the annual flu vaccine.
A core function is trying to help countries overcome collective action problems during disease outbreaks. WHO does this through activities like providing information and technical advice. WHO monitors, collects, and shares epidemiological information about ongoing outbreaks (e.g., tracking cases of Mpox across countries or classifying new variants during the covid-19 pandemic) and provides advice about how to respond as well as on-the-ground support in doing so.
For instance, in the past week WHO has reported on a potential Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Marburg Virus in Tanzania, and Sudan Ebola Virus in Uganda. WHO is serving a key information collection and advising role in each outbreak. In the case of Marburg, WHO reported on the suspected cases before they were confirmed by Tanzania’s government, WHO staff deployed to the outbreak zone, and WHO has provided essential medical supplies such as testing kits and personal protective equipment.
Of course, WHO is not always successful in this role. WHO responded too late, many critics believe, to outbreaks of Ebola in 2014 and AIDS in the 1990s. It updated key guidance during the covid pandemic too slowly. Organizationally, the WHO took too long to respond to evidence of sexual assault perpetrated by WHO employees.
As is the case with any international organization, WHO is made up of member countries and so the organization’s successes and failures should be seen as a joint venture rather than the organization’s sole responsibility. Still, WHO remains the leading voice in global health. People listen to WHO despite its limited enforcement power and the proliferation of other powerful organizations – like the Gates Foundation. While governments do not always follow WHO guidance – and even sometimes do the opposite – no other health organization similarly commands the attention of most governments around the world.