The World Health Organization has expressed deep regret over the formal notification of withdrawal submitted by the United States, warning that the decision leaves both the American nation and the broader global community less safe. As a foundational member of the WHO, the United States has historically contributed significantly to many of the organization’s most celebrated public health achievements over the decades. These collaborative milestones include the historic eradication of smallpox, alongside monumental global progress against a vast array of persistent public health threats such as polio, HIV, Ebola, influenza, tuberculosis, malaria, neglected tropical diseases, antimicrobial resistance, and critical food safety standards.
The official notification of withdrawal raises complex institutional and legal issues that will be formally addressed by the WHO Executive Board during its upcoming regular meeting scheduled to begin on February 2. Following that executive review, the matter will be brought before the wider World Health Assembly at its annual meeting in May 2026 for further deliberation and procedural handling.
In response to recent statements from the government of the United States alleging that the global health agency has compromised its institutional independence, "trashed and tarnished," and insulted Washington, the WHO firmly maintains that the exact reverse is true. Emphasizing its diplomatic and operational standards, the organization noted that, just as it strives to do with every individual Member State, the WHO has consistently sought to engage with the United States in good faith, always maintaining full respect for its national sovereignty.
Among the principal motivations cited by the United States for its withdrawal are alleged failures by the WHO during the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Washington specifically pointed to accusations that the organization obstructed the timely and accurate sharing of critical health information and subsequently attempted to conceal those administrative failures. While acknowledging that no single organization, agency, or national government managed every aspect of the unprecedented crisis flawlessly, the WHO stands resolutely by its comprehensive response to the global health emergency.
Throughout the duration of the pandemic, the organization asserts that it acted with urgency, sharing all available information rapidly and transparently with the international community. Its guidance to Member States was formulated strictly on the basis of the best available scientific evidence at any given time. The WHO famously recommended practical public health measures such as the use of masks, vaccination, and physical distancing, but at no point did the agency issue global mandates for masks, vaccines, or sweeping societal lockdowns. Instead, the organization supported sovereign governments in making the difficult decisions they believed were genuinely in the best interests of their respective populations, leaving the implementation of those measures entirely to national authorities.
The timeline of the organization’s initial response highlights a rapid mobilization of international resources. Immediately after receiving the very first official reports detailing a cluster of cases involving an unidentified "pneumonia of unknown cause" in Wuhan, China, on December 31, 2019, the WHO formally requested more detailed information from Chinese authorities and simultaneously activated its emergency incident management system. By the time the first official death resulting from the novel virus was reported from China on January 11, 2020, the organization had already alerted the world through formal diplomatic channels, public statements, and social media platforms. Furthermore, it had convened global scientific experts and published comprehensive technical guidance advising countries worldwide on how best to protect their populations and safeguard their healthcare systems.
When the WHO Director-General officially declared COVID-19 to be a public health emergency of international concern on January 30, 2020, operating under the formal framework of the International Health Regulations, it represented the highest level of alarm permitted under international health law. At the exact moment this maximum alert level was declared, the total number of reported cases outside of mainland China stood at fewer than 100, and there had been zero reported deaths outside the country.
During the critical opening weeks and months of the unfolding global crisis, the Director-General repeatedly urged all national governments to take immediate, decisive action to shield their populations. He issued stark warnings, famously declaring that "the window of opportunity is closing," emphasizing that "this is not a drill," and categorizing the emerging pathogen directly as "public enemy number one."
In the wake of multiple independent and institutional reviews examining the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic—including evaluations focused specifically on the operational performance of the WHO itself—the organization has proactively implemented numerous internal steps to strengthen its own institutional frameworks. These measures are designed to better support individual countries in bolstering their domestic pandemic preparedness and response capabilities for the future. The specialized surveillance, alert, and response systems that the agency developed and managed before, during, and after the acute emergency phase of the pandemic remain operational around the clock. These continuous monitoring networks have contributed directly to keeping all nations safe, including the United States.
Addressing another core concern raised in Washington’s statements, the United States asserted that the WHO has increasingly pursued a politicized, bureaucratic agenda that is driven primarily by nations hostile to American interests. The organization firmly rejected this characterization as entirely untrue. Operating as a specialized agency of the United Nations governed collectively by 194 distinct Member States, the WHO maintains that it has always been, and remains, strictly impartial. Its fundamental purpose is to serve every country equitably, with unwavering respect for national sovereignty, and to operate without fear or favor.
Despite the withdrawal notification, the WHO expressed sincere appreciation for the steadfast support and continued active engagement of all its other Member States. These nations continue to collaborate closely within the established framework of the organization to pursue cooperative solutions to the world’s most pressing health threats, encompassing both communicable and noncommunicable diseases.
A prominent example of this ongoing multilateral cooperation occurred last year, when WHO Member States successfully adopted the landmark WHO Pandemic Agreement. Once fully ratified by participating nations, this historic accord will serve as a vital instrument of international law designed to keep the world significantly safer from future pandemics. Building upon this foundation, Member States are currently engaged in delicate negotiations regarding a specialized annex to the agreement—known as the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing system. If successfully adopted, this mechanism will actively promote the rapid detection and transparent sharing of pathogens carrying pandemic potential, while simultaneously ensuring equitable and timely global access to life-saving vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostic tools.
Concluding its official response, the organization stated its hope that the United States will eventually choose to return to active participation within the WHO in the future. In the meantime, the global health agency remains steadfastly and unequivocally committed to working hand-in-hand with all countries across the globe in pursuit of its core institutional mission and foundational constitutional mandate: achieving the highest attainable standard of health as a fundamental, universal human right for all people.
