The director general of the World Health Organization Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is addressed to the World Health Assembly on May 19. This is the first rally of this type that the United States has not attended for almost 80 years following the plan of President Trump to withdraw from membership.
Fabrice Coffrini // AFP via Getty Images / AFP
hide
tilting legend
Fabrice Coffrini // AFP via Getty Images / AFP
It is the largest world health meeting of the year. And the United States will not take place at the table.
This week, representatives of the 194 countries of the World Health Organization – less the United States – meet in Geneva to discuss and vote on policies that will shape global health in the years and decades to come. The subjects range from the preparing of the next pandemic to prevention of lung cancer by reducing air pollution.
So where are the United States? The day of the inauguration, President Donald Trump announced plans to withdraw of the WHO, saying that the United Nations had “torn” the United States and stated that it is controlled by China. For the first time since 1948, the United States – which provides approximately a fifth of the budget of $ 6.8 billion – will be absent from the Annual World Health Assembly.
“It is very sad that the United States is no longer in the group of countries who want to help make the world better,” said Barbara Storage of Great BritainThe president of the panel of a global public health convention, an independent group focused on pandemic prevention.
This blatant absence of people and money will affect both WHO’s ability to combat health crises that do not care about borders – as well as the United States’s ability to collaborate with the rest of the world to solve them, say the world’s health specialists interviewed by NPR.
But the assembly also comes at a time of opportunity. After years difficult negotiationsMember countries are about to adopt the Pandemic Treaty, an agreement to ensure that the globe responds better to the next pandemic than COVVI-19.
“This World Health Assembly will be historic,” said Lawrence GostinProfessor at the University of Georgetown and director of the Center for the Collaboration of the World Health Organization on National and World Health Law. “In a way, it will be triumphant,” he said, referring to the pandemic treaty. “And in another way, it will be tragic … because the United States will not be there.”
Here is what to monitor at the World Health Assembly of this year: how will add to its financing crisis; If who adopts the Pandemic Treaty and what health objectives will be set American speech
The elephant is not in the room
As the largest financial contributor to WHO, the United States has historically played a disproportionate role in negotiations.
“When the United States wanted something, it could lead and influence like no other country, including our rivals, such as China or Russia,” said Gostin. “The United States will not be there to have this kind of influence now and in the foreseeable future. For me, it’s terribly sad.”
What emerges in this vacuum of American leadership is not yet clear.
“What is missing now for whom is not only the budget,” said Christoph BennDirector of World Health Diplomacy at the JEP Lange Institute in Amsterdam. “The United States has some of the most sophisticated systems of health expertise in the world. Some of the best experts still come from the United States, and I can honestly say that we will be slowly missing.”
But discussion and negotiations will continue. Given the political climate in the United States, some suspect that their absence could galvanize the meeting.
“I think there are a lot of countries that have the impression of being able to expire in our absence and focus on work and not have confined conversations in political debates,” said a former American health official who was delegate at previous assemblies but asked for the anonymity of fear of the Trump administration.
For example, some pandemic treaty observers suspect that the brutal withdrawal from the Trump administration prompted countries to finalize the agreement before the World Health Assembly. It remains to be seen if this productive dynamic continues.
“I will pay attention to who appears not only as leaders, but perhaps as partners and employees,” said the manager. “There is a constant question of who takes over now. Maybe it will not be China, maybe it will be the world of world that will work together to solve problems.”
NPR contacted the White House to comment on the next meeting but did not receive an answer.
A huge hole in the budget
Which faces the most important budgetary crisis of its almost 80 years of history.
They are already short of $ 600 million for the budget of $ 6.8 billion 2024-2025 and face even more drastic deficits in the next two years due to the Trump administration decision to end US members.
The American exit “left a big hole in the budget of whom the other smaller contributions from other countries around the world could not compensate,” said Benn.
Already, which has reduced its budget offered for 2026-2027 by around 20% to compensate. “To be frank, we cannot do everything,” said OMS Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus OMS Director in a Budget Committee Meeting Last week, noting that who started reducing positions, including about half of the management team, and will reduce programs worldwide.
“What the world will notice most radically are the cuts in emergency programs,” said Benn, who, according to him, allowed countries to quickly react to epidemics, as mpox Or EbolaAnd quickly relay this information to whom. “If these country programs should be reduced, it is a big loss.”
But who works to diversify his cash flows. The organization is funded by a mixture of compulsory contributions – the Member States contribute according to the size of their economy – and voluntary contributions. Voluntary contributions can come from member countries and philanthropic donors – led by the Gates Foundation (which is an NPR donor and this blog).
“The share of compulsory contributions (in the total budget) has been historically very low, no more than 20 to 25%, which means that the rest of the budget is voluntary contributions,” said Benn. Who tries to change this. This week, the Member States will vote on the reduction of compulsory contributions to 30%, said Benn.
Even again, which could be more than $ 1 billion for its next budget, and it is not only because of the American withdrawal.
Many other countries tighten their belts in the face of global economic uncertainty. Consequently, “which also uses the private sector and the private foundations to increase their contributions,” said Benn.
“I probably attended 25 world health assemblies in my lifetime,” said Benn. “I foresee that the mood this time will be very lowered. I think it will be palpable that there is a feeling of crisis here.”
Pandemic treaty to adopt
After more than Three years of negotiationsThe 193 WHO member countries – but not the United States – should adopt the Pandemic prevention, preparation, preparation and response contractwhich would oblige countries to cooperate to prevent and respond to any future pandemic. But the treaty is not without its controversies, some of which remain to be settled.
The agreement is “one of the direct learning of COVVI-19″, ” Maria Van KerkhoveInterim director of the Department of Preparation and Prevention of the Epidemia and the Pandemic at the WHO, NPR in an interview on Friday. “To say not only that the world wants to do better, but take concrete measures to do so.”
THE 30 -page treaty Covers a wide range of subjects, pay more attention to the risk of viruses that spread animals to the protection of health workers. But years of difficult negotiations have reduced the initial ambition and the scope of the agreement.
“People could look at the agreement and say that the language is imperfect and of course it is not perfect,” said Van Kerhove. “But there is so much to work in what is really written there.”
Even if the countries adopt the agreement, there are non -resolved details around the most controversial issue – rich countries sharing the technology of vaccines and processing in exchange for data on epidemics of low and intermediate income countries.
The agreement attempted to formalize this exchange via the system of access to pathogens and service sharing. “I call it a kind of great social world affair,” said Gostin.
“High income countries would have access to critical health information and scientific exchanges such as pathogens samples, the genomic sequencing data we need to develop vaccines and vital treatments,” he said. “In return, we will agree to distribute these medical products equally around the world, thanks to whom.”
This great affair turned out to be controversial. Some richer countries are reluctant to the prospect of forcing their pharmaceutical industries, while low -income countries protest against the idea of sharing the data necessary to design processing and vaccines without guarantee that they will benefit from it.
For the moment, countries have agreed to come to “mutually agreed conditions” on this issue in the next year. Whatever decided, the United States will not be part of it.
“It is difficult for me to see how the United States becomes quick and quick access to the types of scientific information we need to quickly develop our vaccines and our treatments,” said Gostin. “It could be a problem for each American.”