By Twink Jones Gadama

The potential withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO) raises significant concerns for global health, particularly for countries like Malawi, which rely heavily on international support and collaboration to bolster their healthcare systems. Malawi, a nation grappling with numerous health challenges, including high rates of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and maternal and child mortality, stands at a precarious juncture. The implications of the USA’s withdrawal from the WHO could reverberate through Malawi’s healthcare system, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities and hindering progress toward achieving universal health coverage.

To understand the potential consequences of such a withdrawal, it is essential to recognize the role that the WHO plays in global health governance. The organization provides critical support to countries in various forms, including technical assistance, funding, and the establishment of health standards. For Malawi, the WHO has been instrumental in coordinating responses to health crises, facilitating vaccination campaigns, and providing guidance on disease prevention and control. The loss of American support for the WHO could undermine these efforts, leaving Malawi to navigate its health challenges with diminished resources and expertise.

Malawi’s healthcare system is already under strain, characterized by a shortage of healthcare professionals, inadequate infrastructure, and limited access to essential medicines. The country has made strides in improving health outcomes over the past two decades, but these gains are fragile and heavily dependent on external funding and support. The USA has historically been one of the largest contributors to the WHO, and its withdrawal could lead to a significant reduction in the organization’s budget. This, in turn, would likely result in cuts to programs that directly benefit Malawi, such as those aimed at combating infectious diseases and improving maternal and child health.

One of the most pressing health issues in Malawi is the high prevalence of HIV/AIDS. The country has one of the highest rates of HIV infection in the world, with approximately 9% of the adult population living with the virus. The WHO has played a crucial role in supporting Malawi’s efforts to provide antiretroviral therapy (ART) to those in need, as well as in implementing prevention strategies. If the USA withdraws from the WHO, the funding and resources that support these initiatives could dwindle, jeopardizing the progress made in reducing HIV transmission and improving the quality of life for those living with the virus.

Moreover, Malawi faces significant challenges in addressing tuberculosis (TB), which remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. The WHO has been pivotal in providing technical assistance and resources for TB control programs in Malawi. A reduction in WHO funding and support could hinder the country’s ability to implement effective TB prevention and treatment strategies, potentially leading to an increase in TB cases and further straining an already overburdened healthcare system.

Maternal and child health is another critical area where Malawi has made progress, yet significant challenges remain. The country has one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the world, with approximately 439 deaths per 100,000 live births. The WHO has been instrumental in supporting initiatives aimed at improving maternal healthcare, including antenatal care, skilled birth attendance, and postnatal care. The potential withdrawal of the USA from the WHO could disrupt these programs, making it more difficult for Malawi to achieve its goals of reducing maternal and child mortality.

In addition to the direct impact on health programs, the USA’s withdrawal from the WHO could also have broader implications for global health governance. The WHO serves as a platform for international collaboration and coordination in addressing health challenges that transcend national borders. The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the importance of global solidarity in responding to health crises. If the USA withdraws from the WHO, it could set a precedent for other countries to follow suit, leading to a fragmentation of global health efforts. For Malawi, this could mean a loss of access to vital information, research, and best practices that are essential for addressing its health challenges.

Furthermore, the potential withdrawal could weaken the WHO’s ability to respond to emerging health threats, such as pandemics and antibiotic resistance. Malawi, like many low-income countries, is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of such threats due to its limited healthcare infrastructure and resources. A weakened WHO would struggle to provide the necessary support and guidance to countries like Malawi, leaving them ill-equipped to handle future health crises.

The implications of the USA’s withdrawal from the WHO extend beyond immediate health concerns; they also touch on issues of equity and justice in global health. Malawi, as a low-income country, is already at a disadvantage in terms of access to healthcare resources and services. The potential loss of support from the WHO could exacerbate existing inequalities, making it even more challenging for Malawi to achieve its health goals. The global health landscape is interconnected, and the health of one nation can significantly impact the health of others. A withdrawal by the USA could undermine the collective efforts needed to address health disparities and promote health equity on a global scale.

In conclusion, the potential withdrawal of the USA from the World Health Organization poses a significant threat to Malawi’s healthcare system and its ability to address pressing health challenges. The WHO has been a vital partner in supporting Malawi’s health initiatives, and a reduction in funding and resources could jeopardize the progress made in combating diseases such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and maternal and child mortality. Moreover, the broader implications for global health governance and equity cannot be overlooked. As the world grapples with complex health challenges, it is imperative that countries work together to strengthen global health systems rather than retreating into isolationism. For Malawi, the stakes are high, and the potential consequences of the USA’s withdrawal from the WHO could reverberate for years to come, hindering the country’s efforts to achieve better health outcomes for its population. The international community must recognize the interconnectedness of health and work collaboratively to ensure that vulnerable nations like Malawi are not left behind in the pursuit of global health security.

WITHDRAWING THE UNITED STATES FROM THE WORLD
HEALTH ORGANIZATION

EXECUTIVE ORDER

January 20, 2025

WITHDRAWING THE UNITED STATES FROM THE WORLD

HEALTH ORGANIZATION 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: 

Section 1.  Purpose.  The United States noticed its withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2020 due to the organization’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic that arose out of Wuhan, China, and other global health crises, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states.  In addition, the WHO continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States, far out of proportion with other countries’ assessed payments.  China, with a population of 1.4 billion, has 300 percent of the population of the United States, yet contributes nearly 90 percent less to the WHO.  

Sec. 2.  Actions.  (a) The United States intends to withdraw from the WHO.  The Presidential Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations signed on January 20, 2021, that retracted the United States’ July 6, 2020, notification of withdrawal is revoked.

(b)  Executive Order 13987 of January 25, 2021 (Organizing and Mobilizing the United States Government to Provide a Unified and Effective Response to Combat COVID–19 and to Provide United States Leadership on Global Health and Security), is revoked.

(c)  The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs shall establish directorates and coordinating mechanisms within the National Security Council apparatus as he deems necessary and appropriate to safeguard public health and fortify biosecurity.

(d)  The Secretary of State and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall take appropriate measures, with all practicable speed, to:

(i)    pause the future transfer of any United States Government funds, support, or resources to the WHO;

(ii)   recall and reassign United States Government personnel or contractors working in any capacity with the WHO; and  

(iii)  identify credible and transparent United States and international partners to assume necessary activities previously undertaken by the WHO.

(e)  The Director of the White House Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy shall review, rescind, and replace the 2024 U.S. Global Health Security Strategy as soon as practicable. 

Sec. 3.  Notification.  The Secretary of State shall immediately inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations, any other applicable depositary, and the leadership of the WHO of the withdrawal.

Sec. 4.  Global System Negotiations.  While withdrawal is in progress, the Secretary of State will cease negotiations on the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the amendments to the International Health Regulations, and actions taken to effectuate such agreement and amendments will have no binding force on the United States.  

Sec. 5.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: 

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or 

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. 

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. 

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. 

THE WHITE HOUSE,

    January 20, 2025.