in summer In 2020, 15 recognized leaders in U.S. public health came together for authors. article The Lancet, one of the world’s most prestigious medical journals, condemned President Donald Trump’s intention to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization, a decision that was later reversed by President Biden before it took effect.
Almost five years later, one of the first salvoes of President Trump’s second term was: Start the withdrawal process again US from WHO. The move is already controversial and could face legal challenges.
According to Joint resolution of 1948 The bill, which has been passed by both houses of Congress, would require the US to notify the WHO one year in advance of any such withdrawal, but President Trump’s intention appears to be to withdraw immediately without seeking Congressional approval. .
“Although the executive order announces immediate withdrawal from the WHO, the president has not sought Congressional approval or provided the required one year’s notice,” Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, D.C. says Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law. He is one of the co-authors of the 2020 Lancet paper. “In my opinion, this is reckless, it is lawless, and it needs to be challenged in court.”
President Trump has a long history of criticizing the WHO, previously accusing the organization of being “corrupt,” robbing the United States and committing “gross mismanagement and cover-up” of the spread of the coronavirus. I was doing it. The United States has historically been one of the largest donors to the WHO, with some estimates providing one-fifth of the organization’s entire budget. From 2022 to 2023, the United States provided the following information to WHO: Approximately $1.3 billion.
But Gostin and others are particularly concerned about the impact a U.S. withdrawal would have on the country’s ability to deal with the ongoing threat of infectious disease. The WHO has a wide range of powers, from advice on essential medicines to public policy recommendations on everything from tobacco and drug use to road safety, but arguably the most influential are: regarding the surveillance of potentially troubling new diseases. Avian influenza response and international response coordination.
“Withdrawing from the WHO leaves us even more alone in the world, more vulnerable and more vulnerable,” Gostin says. “We can’t close our borders to pathogens. We need to put out fires on the ground before the WHO arrives in the U.S. We also need to fight the mutations that are needed to develop life-saving vaccines and treatments. We also need the WHO’s vast network to provide us with information about the virus.”
Sten Vermund, chief medical officer of the Global Virus Network and another co-author of the Lancet paper, said what happens next will depend on how other countries, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, It will depend on the reactions of non-governmental organizations such as the World Bank and Gavi. Both vaccine alliances provide significant funding to the WHO. After President Trump cut US contributions to the WHO to $680 million in 2020-2021, Germany answered Quadruple contributions to more than $1 billion. danish government also agreed It aims to double its contribution with a focus on improving sexual and reproductive health and tackling the rise in non-communicable diseases.