Implications of US Withdrawal from World Bodies – Asrar Qureshi’s Blog Post #1214

Implications of US Withdrawal from World Bodies – Asrar Qureshi’s Blog Post #1214

Dear Colleagues! This is Asrar Qureshi’s Blog Post #1214 for Pharma Veterans. Pharma Veterans Blogs are published by Asrar Qureshi on its dedicated site https://pharmaveterans.com. Please email to pharmaveterans2017@gmail.com  for publishing your contributions here.

Credit: Safi Erneste

Preamble

This blog post is based on an article written by Lydia Gichuki for DevelopmentAid Digest.. Link at the end.

When a Superpower Steps Back: How the U.S. Exit from 66 Global Bodies Is Rewriting the World System

In early January 2026, the United States government made a move with seismic implications for international cooperation: President Donald J. Trump signed a presidential memorandum directing the withdrawal of the U.S. from 66 international organizations, a sweeping disengagement that spans United Nations bodies and non-UN multilateral institutions.

This move marks far more than a policy shift. It heralds a new phase in the global order, one in which the long-standing U.S. commitment to multilateral cooperation is being replaced with a model centered on sovereignty, national interest, and “America First” priorities. The scale and breadth of the exit have already sent shockwaves through global institutions, diplomatic networks, and development systems that have relied for decades on American leadership and funding.

What the Withdrawal Covers

Under the January 7, 2026, presidential memorandum, the U.S. is pulling out of 66 entities, comprising 31 United Nations agencies and 35 non-UN organizations, that the administration considers contrary to its national interests and sovereignty.

Key components of the withdrawal include institutions that work on:

• Economic and social development

• Climate change and environmental governance

• Human rights and population issues

• Trade and global cooperation

Among the UN organizations affected are major bodies such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the UN Population Fund, along with other commissions and specialized programs tied to development, trade, and social policy.

Non-UN organizations on the list range from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a leading scientific authority on global warming, to the International Renewable Energy Agency and the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise.

This is not incremental withdrawal; it is a comprehensive retrenchment from the institutional architecture that has governed global cooperation since the end of World War II.

Why the U.S. Says It Is Leaving

The White House framed the move as a restoration of American sovereignty and a rejection of multilateral bodies it sees as “ineffective, wasteful, or contrary to U.S. interests.”

According to the official fact sheet:

• These organizations are regarded as advancing ideologies and agendas that conflict with U.S. priorities.

• U.S. taxpayer funds are better spent on domestic priorities such as infrastructure, border security, and national defense.

• Participation in certain global bodies is seen as eroding sovereign decision-making and committing funds with limited or unclear returns.

In the domestic political framing of the action, it is presented not as abandoning the world, but as reprioritizing where and how the U.S. engages internationally and doing so in a way that is purportedly more favorable to internal economic and political objectives.

Immediate and Visible Consequences

Institutional Budget Shortfalls and Operational Strain

One of the most immediate effects is financial. The U.S. has historically been a major contributor to the UN system, covering roughly 22% of the UN’s core budget and nearly 27% of peacekeeping costs.

Without that funding:

• Agencies dependent on American contributions are bracing for budget shortfalls and operational delays.

• Programs in global health, reproductive care, and community support report clinic closures, layoffs, and shortages of essential supplies.

• Healthcare workers have already faced layoffs and the suspension of services, with human consequences such as disrupted HIV treatment and maternal care.

This illustrates how institutional disengagement by a single country, one as powerful as the United States, can ripple quickly into the daily lives of communities worldwide.

Climate Leadership Vacuum

One of the most politically symbolic aspects of the withdrawal is the U.S. exit from climate-related bodies such as the UNFCCC and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, both central pillars of global environmental governance.

Experts interviewed by international media have described this retreat as a “colossal own goal,” weakening U.S. influence on climate finance and policy while creating opportunities for other actors to define the rules and norms for decades to come.

Without the world’s historical largest emitter actively shaping climate processes, the international community may:

• Lose a key negotiating partner and financial contributor.

• Face fragmentation in global climate responses.

• See reduced coherence in mechanisms that undergird global emissions reporting and accountability.

This is not merely symbolic; it affects the very architecture of efforts to address the climate crisis.

A Shift in Global Leadership and Influence

China’s Strategic Opening

As the U.S. steps back, China has positioned itself as a defender of multilateral engagement. Beijing has reaffirmed support for the United Nations and its agencies, portraying itself as committed to cooperative global governance.

China is already the second-largest contributor to the UN budget and has pursued a more assertive diplomatic presence across the Global South. Analysts believe that the U.S. withdrawal creates an opportunity for China to:

• Expand its influence in forums where U.S. leadership once dominated.

• Shape agendas, norms, and funding priorities.

• Deepen strategic partnerships with countries seeking alternatives to a retrenched U.S. presence.

This shift does not automatically translate into China assuming a benevolent leadership role, but it does mean the balance of influence in multilateral diplomacy is likely to recalibrate.

Effects on Smaller and Middle Powers

Multilateral institutions have long provided a mechanism for smaller and medium-sized countries to punch above their weight in negotiations, access funding, and influence global agendas.

The U.S. disengagement risks weakening this capacity. Without a strong U.S. presence to balance the power of larger states, smaller countries may find themselves pressured to negotiate bilaterally with major powers rather than within multilateral frameworks. Their leverage on issues like climate finance, trade rules, and development aid could shrink.

This could reshape global diplomacy, making it more hierarchical and less consensus-oriented.

Legal and Institutional Uncertainty

The memorandum also raises legal and constitutional questions, especially for treaties that the U.S. Senate had ratified decades earlier, such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Because the U.S. Constitution is not explicit about whether a president can unilaterally withdraw from Senate-ratified treaties, legal challenges are likely. The uncertainty itself, whether future administrations can easily rejoin or will require Senate approval, creates diplomatic instability.

Allies and partners, unsure whether U.S. commitments are enduring or ephemeral, may hesitate to make long-term plans or investments in cooperation frameworks.

Can Multilateralism Survive Without the U.S.?

The development sector, diplomats, and global leaders concede that multilateral institutions will not simply collapse. What is unfolding is a stress test that will force these organizations to adapt without a chief architect.

Secretary-General António Guterres has pledged continuity in delivering services and addressing global challenges. Yet doing so without active U.S. participation, especially in terms of funding and leadership, is uncharted territory.

The global system may fragment into issue-specific blocs or regional arrangements, or it may reinvent multilateralism in a more distributed and contested form.

Either way, the old model, one anchored by U.S. leadership, is clearly changing.

Conclusion: A New Phase in Global Order

The withdrawal of the U.S. from 66 international bodies is more than a foreign policy decision. It reflects a reimagining of global engagement, one prioritizing national sovereignty, unilateral decision-making, and domestic reordering of fiscal and ideological priorities.

The consequences are far-reaching:

• Budget shortfalls are affecting humanitarian, health, and development programs.

• Climate governance is losing a central actor halfway through global negotiations.

• China and other rising powers are positioning to fill the vacuum.

• Smaller states face a less predictable environment for collaboration.

• Multilateral institutions are entering a phase of adaptation, not continuity.

What is increasingly clear is that the world is entering a new and less predictable phase of global cooperation, one in which multilateralism must prove it can function without the country that has anchored it for decades, and in which power and influence may be distributed more unevenly across a contested global landscape.

Concluded.

Disclaimers: Pictures in these blogs are taken from free resources at Pexels, Pixabay, Unsplash, and Google. Credit is given where available. If a copyright claim is lodged, we shall remove the picture with appropriate regrets.

For most blogs, I research from several sources which are open to public. Their links are mentioned under references. There is no intent to infringe upon anyone’s copyrights. If, any claim is lodged, it will be acknowledged and duly recognized immediately. 

Reference:

https://www.developmentaid.org/news-stream/post/203659/u-s-walks-away-trumps-66-body-exit-shakes-world-system-rewrites-global-power?utm_campaign=NewsDigest&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=Newsletter&token=db66c8c8-346f-4eae-bfa0-543169fbb180