Why is Trump opposing the WHO and jeopardizing NATO? Experts share their insights.
The President of the United States, Donald Trump, continues his course of reducing U.S. involvement in international organizations, citing their "inefficiency" and financial losses for the American budget. At the same time, the president may increase pressure on NATO allies, insisting they raise their defense spending to lessen the burden on the U.S., reports UNN.
Trump has once again questioned the rationale behind U.S. cooperation with international organizations. In particular, he announced the withdrawal of the U.S. from the World Health Organization. During his first term, Trump had already pulled the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Agreement, the UN Human Rights Council, UNESCO, and a number of key treaties, justifying these actions as a means of protecting American interests.
In a comment to UNN, analyst of the Center for Strategic Communications and Information Security, Maxim Yali, noted that such a policy from Trump was observed earlier during his first term.
Moreover, Trump repeatedly criticized NATO during his first presidential term, particularly for the failure of member countries to meet their financial commitments. He accused allies of spending less than 2% of their GDP on defense, forcing the U.S. to cover the majority of expenses. At the 2018 summit in Brussels, he even threatened to withdraw the U.S. from NATO if allies did not increase their spending.
"Regarding NATO, there are greater risks for individual states. This is also a similar policy: Trump made such statements during his campaign, urging other member states to spend more on defense. This was true during his first term, and even more so now, with Russia at war with Ukraine... Therefore, Trump will certainly use this to push most European Union countries to increase their spending, thereby reducing expenses for the United States. In this context, these statements are quite predictable and are a continuation of the policy that Trump pursued during his first term but did not fully implement. Now he will continue to realize it," concluded analyst Maxim Yali.
Political science candidate and international expert Stanislav Zhelikhovsky remarked in a comment to UNN that Trump emphasized the need to make budget management more efficient throughout his presidential campaign.
According to him, Trump's decisions should allow for the accumulation of more funds for financing various programs and organizational activities, reducing expenses, and optimizing the work of the governmental apparatus.
The expert stated that this would enable the allocation of saved funds to address pressing issues or supposedly improve the welfare of ordinary Americans.
It is evident that Trump's statements and decrees were made to meet the expectations of voters who supported him.
"Thus, Trump effectively thanked his voters in a non-legal sense for enabling him to reclaim the main seat in the White House and govern the United States of America," said the international expert.
One of the important signed decrees concerned the initiation of the process of the U.S. withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO). "This decision was one of many taken by Trump within his executive actions. It is worth noting that this is the second time Trump has initiated the U.S. exit from WHO. The first attempt was made during the coronavirus pandemic when Trump criticized the organization for its response to the crisis. However, this decision was later reversed by President Joseph Biden. Now, signing the decree on the first day of Trump’s new term increases the likelihood that the U.S. will officially leave the organization," Zhelikhovsky explained.
According to Trump, the withdrawal from WHO is due to inadequate management of the pandemic, which originated in China and coincided with his first term, the expert stated.
He also recalled how Trump criticized WHO for its insufficient independence from the political influence of member states, with an additional argument being, as he stated, the unjustifiably high contribution the U.S. pays to WHO, which is part of the UN.
"In other words, it's again about money - showing his voters why we should pay such high contributions, why we should be members of an organization that not only drains our budget but also failed, as he can argue, to cope with the challenges of the pandemic that severely impacted both the American and global economies, affecting all processes that were occurring. Additionally, it should be remembered that during his first presidential term, Trump accused WHO of being aligned with China in its actions related to the pandemic," the political science candidate explained.
He further noted that the anti-China direction of Trump’s policy should also be considered, as he has never hidden his stance towards the PRC and its ambitions for global leadership.
China prepares for Trump's return: a time of uncertainty20.01.25, 16:57 • 29353 views
"Moreover, concerning Greenland and Panama - all these issues are also discussed in the context of Trump's anti-China views," noted the international expert.
Stanislav Zhelikhovsky pointed out that if the policy aimed at engaging China shifts towards greater pragmatism and cooperation, particularly in the context of a peaceful resolution of the Russian-Ukrainian war, it is possible that neither the promised tariffs against China nor other measures targeting it will be introduced. However, situations like the one that arose with WHO can always be used by Trump to demonstrate to his citizens that he continues to fight against China and its privileged positions in international organizations, showcasing his opposition to China to his voters.
"For example, I (Trump - ed.) decided to create an organization where China allegedly has some preferences. This is a very cunning game from Trump, as he is substituting concepts and has never wanted to acknowledge his mistakes or that he cannot do something. We can observe a similar situation in the Middle East," the international expert noted.
Israel releases 90 Palestinian prisoners after deal with Hamas20.01.25, 04:18 • 23452 views
He added that Trump was unable to resolve the issue related to the Russian-Ukrainian war before even entering the Cabinet, as promised. 24 hours have passed, yet he has still not resolved the situation. However, he managed to achieve certain results in the Middle East. The U.S. president emphasizes that he has done everything possible, and due to his efforts, the resolution between Israel and Hamas has begun. "Therefore, he can use such matters in his rhetoric. He will seek other options, knowing that not all Americans are well-versed in international politics. For instance, if he states that he is opposing China in the health organization and asserts that there is no need to cooperate with a country that holds greater influence in WHO, it could appear as an attempt to pursue his own path," said Stanislav Zhelikhovsky.
The international expert reminded that a similar story occurred with the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement. According to him, this decision can also be presented from different angles. The political science candidate believes that such processes will continue in the future. However, it should be remembered that Trump will be president for 4 years, and when power changes in the country, especially if the new president belongs to a different party, the Democratic Party, these decisions may be revisited.
"Then the United States may return to both the Paris Climate Agreement and the World Health Organization and other structures from which Trump may withdraw during his second term," Zhelikhovsky noted.
Political science candidate Stanislav Zhelikhovsky, in a comment to UNN, addressed the question of whether there are risks for NATO now.
"At the end of December 2023, both chambers of the U.S. Congress passed a decision that prohibits any president from announcing the withdrawal of the U.S. from the North Atlantic Alliance without the consent of Congress at any time. Accordingly, preemptive initiatives were submitted, which serve as a safeguard, and it will not be easy for Trump to do this," the international expert explained.
Stanislav Zhelikhovsky noted that although Congress is currently controlled by the Republican Party, not all of its members support Trump's policies, especially regarding controversial and fundamental issues. He finds it unlikely that U.S. lawmakers will be able to gather sufficient votes for such initiatives.
According to Zhelikhovsky, both Democrats and some Republicans will oppose, so Trump is unlikely to address this issue. The most he might consider is reducing the role of the U.S. in the Alliance, for instance, in specific programs, funding, or assistance to Ukraine.
Stanislav Zhelikhovsky noted that such a scenario is possible, although it depends on how other countries will make their decisions. He believes that even if not all states reach the five percent defense spending target, an increase in the current level, for example, to 3% or at least ensuring a minimum level of 2%, could diminish Trump's irritation. According to the political science candidate, this concerns not only U.S. membership in