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 miniature statue of US President Donald Trump stands next to a model bunker-buster bomb, with the Iranian national flag in the background, in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, on June 19, 2025.
STR/NurPhoto

US President Donald Trump said Thursday that he will decide whether to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities “in the next two weeks,” a move that re-opens the door to negotiations, but also gives the US more time to position military forces for an operation.

People ride motorcycles as South Korea's LGBTQ community and supporters attend a Pride parade, during the Seoul Queer Culture Festival, in Seoul, South Korea, June 14, 2025.
REUTERS/Kim Soo-hyeon

June is recognized in more than 100 countries in the world as “Pride Month,” marking 55 years since gay liberation marches began commemorating the Stonewall riots – a pivotal uprising against the police’s targeting of LGBTQ+ communities in New York.

Port of Nice, France, during the United Nations Oceans Conference in June 2025.
María José Valverde

Eurasia Group’s biodiversity and sustainability analyst María José Valverde sat down with Rebecca Hubbard, the director of the High Seas Alliance, to discuss the High Seas Treaty.

Housing shortages in the US and Canada have become a significant problem – and a contentious political issue – in recent years. New data on housing construction this week suggest neither country is making enough progress to solve the shortfalls. Here’s a snapshot of the situation on both sides of the border.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford speaks during a meeting of northeastern U.S. Governors and Canadian Premiers, in Boston, Massachusetts, U.S., June 16, 2025.
REUTERS/Sophie Park

While the national level drama played out between Donald Trump and Mark Carney at the G7 in Kananaskis, a lot of important US-Canada work was going on with far less fanfare in Boston, where five Canadian premiers met with governors and delegations from seven US states.

- YouTube

What’s next for Iran’s regime? Ian Bremmer says, “It’s much more likely that the supreme leader ends up out, but the military… continues to run the country.”

Enbridge’s 2024 Sustainability Report is now available, outlining our approach to meeting today’s energy needs while advancing solutions for tomorrow. Now in its 24th year, the report reflects our ongoing commitment to being a safe operator of essential energy infrastructure and a responsible environmental steward, principles at the heart of our mission to be North America’s first-choice energy delivery company. Highlights include a 40% reduction in emissions intensity, surpassing our 2030 target, and a 22% drop in absolute emissions since setting our goals in 2020. Explore the 2024 Sustainability Report today.