Is Trump right to ditch the WHO?

The world's worst health crisis in a hundred years might not seem like the best time for the World Health Organization's biggest financial supporter to threaten to pull the plug on its operations, but that's where we are. On Friday afternoon, President Trump announced that the US is withdrawing entirely from the Organization.

The move comes ten days after the White House sent a withering four-page letter to the organization's Director General which accused the organization of ignoring early warnings about the virus' spread and bowing to Chinese efforts to downplay its severity. The letter closed with a threat to withdraw within 30 days unless the WHO shaped up to better serve "American interests." In the end, the Administration had patience only for 10 days after all.

Some argue that Trump is simply trying to divert attention from his own handling of the outbreak in the United States. Others counter that, love Trump or hate him, he's right about this. Here's a useful fact check of some of the letter's specific claims.

So, is Trump's criticism of the WHO fair?

Yes, the WHO is broken and must be forced to change. Faced with the outbreak of a potentially severe new illness, the WHO failed to expose the facts of the case. The organization either did not see or did not acknowledge evidence that China hid the true scale of the virus' threat and punished Chinese doctors who publicly warned that risks were growing. In January, the WHO's inspector publicly praised "China's commitment to transparency."

The refusal to directly provide information to Taiwan – which is excluded from membership in the organization out of international deference to China's wishes – put millions of Taiwanese people at unnecessary risk. Where's the transparency in that? Whether the WHO's failure was a result of ignorance or cowardice in the face of Beijing's newly assertive leadership, these problems cost the world valuable time that could have been used to slow momentum toward a global pandemic.

In sum, if the "WHO" can't safeguard "WH" at a moment like this, then we clearly need to remake the "O" itself.

No, Trump fails to understand what the WHO is and isn't. First, the Organization doesn't have a mandate to enter any of its member states "uninvited." Any restrictions on entry are China's to answer for, not the WHO's. And while China is prickly, it's hard to imagine the United States government – or many others for that matter – giving an international health organization free access to any information it wants.

Second, how do you blame the WHO for sounding the alarm late when the White House ignored the earliest WHO warnings. The organization called the virus a "global health emergency" in January. The Trump administration waited until March 16 to issue national social distancing guidelines. Had this been done even two weeks earlier, some virologists say, as many as 90 percent of American deaths could have been prevented.

Third, even if the WHO should be reformed, threatening to walk away from it in the middle of a pandemic is dangerous and short-sighted. COVID-19 is currently wreaking havoc in low-income countries that rely on WHO personnel and infrastructure to manage large parts of the pandemic response. Pulling the plug now risks an even greater human catastrophe.

Finally, Trump's threat is strategically foolish. If you're worried about Chinese influence at the WHO, walking out risks opening the way for...China! Just hours before Trump sent that letter 10 days ago, Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged up to $2 billion to help the WHO's global pandemic response efforts. Is that really what the White House wants?

What do you think? Is the current WHO a big problem in need of urgent reform, or is it an imperfect organization that's a lot better than any current alternatives?

EDITORS NOTE: This story has been updated to lead with President Trump's May 29 announcement that the US is cutting ties to the World Health Organization.

More from GZERO Media

A 3D-printed miniature model depicting US President Donald Trump, the Chinese flag, and the word "tariffs" in this illustration taken on April 17, 2025.

REUTERS/Dado Ruvic

The US economy contracted 0.3% at an annualized rate in the first quarter of 2025, while China’s manufacturing plants saw their sharpest monthly slowdown in over a year. Behind the scenes, the world’s two largest economies are backing away from their extraordinary trade war.

A photovoltaic power station with a capacity of 0.8 MW covers an area of more than 3,000 square metres at the industrial site of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, Kyiv region, Ukraine, on April 12, 2025.
Volodymyr Tarasov/Ukrinform/ABACAPRESS.COM

Two months after their infamous White House fight, the US and Ukraine announced on Wednesday that they had finally struck a long-awaited minerals deal.

Indian paramilitary soldiers patrol along a road in Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, on April 29, 2025.
Firdous Nazir via Reuters Connect

Nerves are fraught throughout Pakistan after authorities said Wednesday they have “credible intelligence” that India plans to launch military strikes on its soil by Friday.

Palestinian Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters form a human chain in front of the crowd gathered near the family home of slain Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, where the Hamas militant group prepares to hand over Israeli and Thai hostages to a Red Cross team in Khan Yunis, on January 30, 2025, as part of their third hostage-prisoner exchange..
Photo by Majdi Fathi/NurPhot

Israel hunted Yahya Sinwar — the Hamas leader and mastermind of the Oct. 7 attack — for over a year. He was hidden deep within Gaza’s shadowy tunnel networks.

A gunman stands as Syrian security forces check vehicles entering Druze town of Jaramana, following deadly clashes sparked by a purported recording of a Druze man cursing the Prophet Mohammad which angered Sunni gunmen, as rescuers and security sources say, in southeast of Damascus, Syria April 29, 2025.
REUTERS/Yamam Al Shaar

Israel said the deadly drone strike was carried out on behalf of Syria's Druze community.

Britain's King Charles holds an audience with the Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney at Buckingham Palace, on March 17, 2025.

Aaron Chown/Pool via REUTERS

King Charles is rumored to have been invited to Canada to deliver the speech from the throne, likely in late May, although whether he attends may depend on sensitivities in the office of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Getting access to energy, whether it's renewables, oil and gas, or other sources, is increasingly challenging because of long lead times to get things built in the US and elsewhere, says Greg Ebel, Enbridge's CEO, on the latest "Energized: The Future of Energy" podcast episode. And it's not just problems with access. “There is an energy emergency, if we're not careful, when it comes to price,” says Ebel. “There's definitely an energy emergency when it comes to having a resilient grid, whether it's a pipeline grid, an electric grid. That's something I think people have to take seriously.” Ebel believes that finding "the intersection of rhetoric, policy, and capital" can lead to affordability and profitability for the energy transition. His discussion with host JJ Ramberg and Arjun Murti, founder of the energy transition newsletter Super-Spiked, addresses where North America stands in the global energy transition, the implication of the revised energy policies by President Trump, and the potential consequences of tariffs and trade tension on the energy sector. “Energized: The Future of Energy” is a podcast series produced by GZERO Media's Blue Circle Studios in partnership with Enbridge. Listen to this episode at gzeromedia.com/energized, or on Apple, Spotify,Goodpods, or wherever you get your podcasts.