U.S. formally exits WHO, ending 78-year partnership

After nearly eight decades as a central pillar of global public health, the United States has officially withdrawn from the World Health Organization (WHO), marking a historic shift in international health diplomacy and igniting widespread concern about the future of pandemic preparedness.

READ ALSO: Burkina Faso says it has foiled new attempt to assassinate Capt Ibrahim Traore

The withdrawal was confirmed on January 22 by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., formally ending America’s 78-year membership in the United Nations’ health agency.

The move follows a one-year notice period triggered by an executive order signed by President Donald Trump shortly after returning to office in January 2025.With the decision now finalized, the U.S. has halted all financial contributions to the WHO, recalled American personnel from the organization, and disengaged from its governing and technical bodies.

The administration has also indicated it will not settle more than $130 million in outstanding dues from 2024 and 2025, opting instead to pursue bilateral health partnerships directly with individual countries. For an organization founded in 1948 with the United States as one of its chief architects and long-time benefactors, the moment is both symbolic and consequential.

For decades, Washington had been the WHO’s largest single contributor, providing hundreds of millions of dollars annually and supplying technical expertise that shaped global disease surveillance, vaccination programs, and emergency response systems. U.S. officials framed the withdrawal as a corrective measure aimed at what they described as the WHO’s failure to reform and its mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

READ ALSO: 2026 Election Calendar: African Countries Heading to the Polls This Year

In public statements, Kennedy and Rubio cited concerns about political influence within the organization, delayed emergency declarations during major outbreaks, and what they called a lack of transparency and accountability. Dr. Ronald Nahass, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, described the move as “shortsighted,” noting that it could disrupt efforts to eradicate polio, contain tuberculosis, and monitor evolving influenza strains that guide seasonal vaccine development.

The implications are especially stark in lower-income regions that depend heavily on WHO-coordinated programs. In parts of Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, WHO funding supports disease surveillance, maternal and child health services, vaccination campaigns, and emergency response infrastructure.

The WHO, for its part, acknowledged the U.S. departure with regret, warning that the funding shortfall would force difficult choices about which programs to scale back. Officials emphasized that the agency would seek increased contributions from other member states and private donors to offset the loss, though they conceded the gap would be difficult to fill quickly.

READ ALSO: US expands visa bond policy, adds 7 more countries to $15,000 requirement – See List

Meanwhile, the U.S. government insists it will remain deeply engaged in international health efforts through non-governmental organizations, research institutions, and direct partnerships with allied nations.