Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO) marks the latest step in a long process of undermining international health governance. In the past, the weaknesses of global health structures became evident during crises such as the Ebola epidemic or outbreaks of influenza, but it was the pandemic that exposed the systemic problems so clearly. Trump’s withdrawal is not an isolated response to the recent crisis, but rather a consistent part of a political trend that has increasingly isolated the U.S. from international health issues. This move has significant consequences: The U.S. contributes a large portion of WHO funding and plays a central role in global health diplomacy. Its absence creates a massive vacuum that can only be partially filled by other powers, such as China.
The incoming federal government now faces the challenge of recognizing this new reality. Rather than clinging to the illusion of a strong, global health order, it should pragmatically seek solutions to ensure at least a minimal level of international cooperation. In a world grappling with increasingly complex health and geopolitical crises, the question remains how a sustainable international health network can be maintained. In this context, it would be advisable to place greater emphasis on partnerships with countries and organizations that, despite global instability, still have a strong interest in a stable health strategy.