Trump walks out on WHO(m)?

Right smack in the middle of the biggest global health crisis in 100 years, US President Donald Trump has announced that the United States is cutting ties to the World Health Organization, the 194-member UN-affiliate that coordinates public health policy among its members.

The move isn't entirely a surprise. In recent weeks, the Trump administration has issued several threats to walk out of the WHO, over what the White House sees as the organization's undue deference to China during the coronavirus crisis.

Why does the US move matter?

The US is by far the largest single funder of the 194-member World Health Organization, contributing as much as $500 million every two years in dues and voluntary contributions. Losing that funding will severely complicate the W.H.O's ability to operate -- not only on coronavirus, but on the myriad other public health and disease-eradication programs it oversees around the world.

Why is Trump doing it?


First, there are important and legitimate questions about whether the WHO was too credulous of China's early claims, and whether it moved too slowly to declare a global pandemic. The WHO, for its part, says it has limited leverage over individual nation-states anyway, and that it has always acted in line with the available data. We recently weighed the pros and cons of Trump's bare-knuckled approach to the WHO here.

Second, there's a US-China angle.The Trump administration, with significant bipartisan support, sees China as a global rival these days. One big beef is China's growing clout at UN-affiliated international organizations. By cutting off the WHO, even for two or three months, Washington is sending Beijing a message that it's willing to play hardball with organizations that seem to cut China slack.

But this can backfire too: when the US pulls back from these organizations, China gets a bigger vacuum to fill. And walking out on the WHO right in the middle of a pandemic seems... questionable. After all, on the same day that Trump recently threatened to cut funding for the WHO, Chinese president Xi Jinping pledged $2bn to support coronavirus-containment efforts in developing countries.

Third, there's a domestic political angle. Trump knows that the coronavirus pandemic has hurt his chances of re-election -- his critics say that's because he's bungled the public health response, while he's mainly worried about the economic effects of the lockdowns. Trump knows that hitting out at China is good politics, not only with his base but with a broadening swath of Americans who view China with suspicion. Trump's move here comes right as Senate GOP bigwigs are advancing their own investigations into the WHO and China.

Fourth, perhaps most importantly, it's worth remembering that the virus itself doesn't care what Trump thinks of the WHO. For Trump to really make political hay out of this, he has to be reasonably confident that the US is moving past the "peak" of coronavirus deaths. If the public health crisis takes another turn for the worse, that will overshadow any political benefit to him and his re-election campaign.

Next up: China's response. Stay tuned...


EDITOR'S NOTE: This piece was updated on May 29 2020 to lead with President Trump's declaration about leaving the World Health Organization.

Howard University President Dr. Wayne A. I. Frederick joins That Made All the Difference podcast to discuss how his career as a surgeon influenced his work as an educator, administrator and champion of underserved communities, and why he believes we may be on the cusp of the next "golden generation."

Listen to the latest podcast now.

It's been a bad week at the office for President Trump. Not only have coronavirus cases in the US been soaring, but The New York Times' bombshell report alleging that Russia paid bounties to the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan has continued to make headlines. While details about the extent of the Russian bounty program — and how long it's been going on for — remain murky, President Trump now finds himself in a massive bind on this issue.

Here are three key questions to consider.

More Show less

Jon Lieber, managing director for the United States at Eurasia Group, provides his perspective on US politics:

How likely is bipartisan action against Russia in light of Taliban bounty reports?

I think it's probably unlikely. One of the challenges here is that there's some conflict of the intelligence and anything that touches on the issue of President Trump and Russia is extremely toxic for him. Republicans have so far been tolerant of that and willing to stop any new sanctions coming. I think unless the political situation or the allegations get much worse or more obvious, that stalemate probably remains.

More Show less

Ian Bremmer's Quick Take:

Yes, still in the middle of coronavirus, but thought I'd give you a couple of my thoughts on Russia. Part of the world that I cut my teeth on as a political scientist, way back in the eighties and nineties. And now Putin is a president for life, or at least he gets to be president until 2036, gets another couple of terms. The constitutional amendments that he reluctantly allowed to be voted on across Russia, passed easily, some 76% approval. And so now both in China and in Russia, term limits get left behind all for the good of the people, of course. So that they can have the leaders that they truly deserve. Yes, I'm being a little sarcastic here. It's sad to see. It's sad to see that the Americans won the Cold War in part, not just because we had a stronger economy and a stronger military, but actually because our ideas were better.

Because when those living in the former Soviet Union and the Eastern Block looked at the West, and looked at the United States, they saw that our liberties, they saw that our economy, was something that they aspired to and was actually a much better way of giving opportunities to the average citizen, than their own system afforded. And that helped them to rise up against it.

More Show less

When hundreds of thousands of protesters in Ethiopia brought sweeping change to their government in 2018, many of them were blaring the music of one man: a popular young activist named Hachalu Hundessa, who sang songs calling for the liberation and empowerment of the Oromo, the country's largest ethnic group.

Earlier this week, the 34-year old Hundessa was gunned down in the country's capital, Addis Ababa.

More Show less