GENEVA— In a world increasingly battered by conflict, outbreaks, and rising health inequities, the very institution tasked with keeping the global health system intact is being pushed to the brink.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is now preparing for its most dramatic contraction in decades, as the United States—once its leading benefactor—turns its back on the international body.
Over the past several months, U.S. funding has slowed to a halt, with President Trump’s administration opting not to renew its 2024 contribution. Now, the organization faces a chilling possibility: surviving 2025 without a lifeline from Washington.
Dr. Hanan Balkhy, WHO’s Regional Director for the Eastern Mediterranean, says the consequences are already visible. “Emergency deployments have stalled. Training initiatives have gone silent. We’re watching entire healthcare frameworks begin to collapse in real time,” she said in an off-camera statement during a closed-door session last week.
Though WHO has weathered past crises, officials say this one is different.
“This isn’t just a budget cut. It’s a message. And the message is: ‘You’re on your own,’” one high-ranking UN health advisor told this outlet under condition of anonymity.
Internal assessments suggest WHO will be forced to shed as much as 20% of its operational capacity unless urgent donor replacements are found. That could mean scaled-back outbreak responses, fewer trauma kits sent to war zones, and massive delays in vaccine logistics for underserved regions.
Meanwhile, USAID—America’s primary tool for soft diplomacy and humanitarian outreach—is reportedly on the chopping block, with the Trump administration taking steps to dismantle the agency altogether.
This sudden vacuum in global health leadership arrives at a dangerous time. Conflict continues to escalate in Sudan and the Gaza Strip, cholera is on the rise in the Horn of Africa, and climate-driven disease migration is complicating traditional response frameworks.
Some experts worry this may be the beginning of a broader unraveling.
“The WHO doesn’t just treat diseases,” said a former senior health envoy from Norway. “It builds systems. It trains people. It teaches countries how to respond without foreign dependency. And now it’s being stripped of its ability to do that.”
While alternative donors may step in to plug short-term gaps, the geopolitical weight of the U.S.—and the symbolic power of its absence—leaves a larger question hanging over Geneva: What happens when the world’s health watchdog loses its teeth?
