US finalizes Exit from WHO, cites pandemic ‘mishandling’, failed reforms

The United States has officially severed its 78-year ties with the World Health Organization (WHO), fulfilling a cornerstone campaign promise by the Trump administration.

On Thursday, the White House announced the finalization of a withdrawal process that has fundamentally reshaped the landscape of global public health.

The exit follows a year-long transition that began on January 20, 2025. Over the last twelve months, the U.S. systematically halted funding, recalled specialized personnel, and pivoted its health initiatives toward direct bilateral agreements with individual nations and private-sector partners.

In a joint statement released by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of State, officials outlined a list of grievances centered on the organization’s accountability and transparency. The administration stated that the withdrawal was necessitated by:
> “the organisation’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic that arose out of Wuhan, China, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states.”

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that while formal membership has ended, a skeletal communication line will remain only for administrative closure. The secretaries noted the U.S. would “be coordinating with WHO solely in a limited fashion to effectuate withdrawal.”

The White House leveled sharp criticism at the WHO’s early response to the 2020 pandemic, alleging that the organization delayed critical emergency declarations. This hesitation, the statement argued, resulted in “costing the world critical weeks as the virus spread.”

The administration specifically highlighted the WHO’s relationship with Beijing during the crisis, asserting that leadership had “echoed and praised China’s response despite evidence of early underreporting, suppression of information and delays in confirming human-to-human transmission.”

Furthermore, the U.S. faulted the body for:

– Downplaying the risks of asymptomatic transmission.
– Failing to acknowledge the airborne nature of the virus promptly.
– Releasing an origins report that lacked scientific rigor.

Regarding the search for the pandemic’s source, the White House remained critical of the WHO’s investigative findings: “Its report evaluating the possible origins of COVID-19 rejected the possibility that scientists created the virus, even though China refused to provide genetic sequences from individuals infected early in the pandemic and information on the Wuhan laboratories’ activities and biosafety conditions,” the statement said.

The departure leaves the WHO with a significant financial vacuum. According to the organization, the United States has not paid its membership fees for 2024 and 2025, a debt totaling roughly $260 million. While member states are expected to discuss the exit at an executive board meeting in February, the WHO admitted it lacks any mechanism to block a sovereign nation from leaving.

WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus voiced deep concern over the move, characterizing it as a major blow to international solidarity.

“I hope that the US will reconsider its decision and rejoin WHO. Withdrawal is a loss for the US and also a loss for the rest of the world… It was not about money but about cooperation and solidarity,” Dr. Tedros said.

Moving forward, the White House insists that the U.S. will not retreat from global health leadership but will instead exercise it through a more “focused and transparent” model. This strategy will prioritize:

– Direct Bilateral Engagement: Working one-on-one with trusted partner nations.
– Private and Faith-Based Partnerships: Leveraging NGOs and private sector innovation.
– Biosecurity and Innovation: Focusing on emergency response and domestic health security.

By bypassing what it termed a “bloated bureaucracy,” the administration aims to ensure that American resources are used for “results-driven” health outcomes rather than international political maneuvering.