Key Takeaways:
- The US has withdrawn from dozens of international organizations deemed "wasteful, ineffective, or harmful" by President Donald Trump.
- Almost half of the 66 organizations are focused on upholding international law and protecting women and children from violence.
- The withdrawal is seen as a reflection of the Trump administration’s "America First" policy, prioritizing national interests over global cooperation.
- The move has been criticized for targeting vulnerable groups and promoting a "might is right" approach to international relations.
- The US has also withdrawn from the Paris Agreement and suspended support for the World Health Organization (WHO) and other UN agencies.
Introduction to the Withdrawal
The United States has withdrawn from dozens of international organizations, citing concerns over their effectiveness and alignment with American interests. The move has been met with criticism from experts and officials, who argue that it undermines global cooperation and promotes a "might is right" approach to international relations. According to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the organizations in question advance agendas "contrary" to the US and pose a threat to the nation’s sovereignty, freedoms, and prosperity.
The Organizations Affected
A review of the list of organizations from which the US has withdrawn reveals a significant focus on climate change, international law, and the protection of vulnerable groups. At least 16 groups are dedicated to addressing climate change and environmental issues, while 14 focus on international law, peacekeeping, and the protection of women and children. A further five groups are focused on curbing international security threats, counterterrorism, and cybercrime. The withdrawal from these organizations has been seen as a reflection of the Trump administration’s priorities, which emphasize national interests over global cooperation.
The Rationale Behind the Withdrawal
The Trump administration has argued that the withdrawal is necessary to protect American interests and promote national sovereignty. According to a White House fact sheet, the organizations in question operate contrary to US national interests, security, economic prosperity, or sovereignty. The administration has also claimed that the organizations promote "radical climate policies, global governance, and ideological programs" that conflict with US values. However, critics argue that the withdrawal is a reflection of the administration’s "America First" policy, which prioritizes national interests over global cooperation and the protection of vulnerable groups.
The Impact on Global Cooperation
The withdrawal from international organizations has significant implications for global cooperation and the protection of vulnerable groups. Experts argue that the move undermines the ability of international organizations to address pressing global challenges, such as climate change and human rights abuses. The withdrawal also sends a message that the US is no longer committed to upholding international law and protecting vulnerable groups, which could have far-reaching consequences for global stability and security. As Dr. Emma Shortis, director of the International & Security Affairs Program at The Australia Institute, noted, "There’s a particular targeting of the poorest and most vulnerable places and organisations… This is showing that the United States under Trump has no interest in building genuine peace, that military might and strength is all they’re interested in."
The Role of Ideology
The withdrawal from international organizations has also been seen as a reflection of the Trump administration’s ideological priorities. The administration’s emphasis on national sovereignty and "America First" has been accompanied by a shift away from international cooperation and the protection of vulnerable groups. As Professor Wesley Widmaier from the Australian National University’s Department of International Relations noted, the institutions chosen for withdrawal align with the Trump administration’s national messaging, which emphasizes the need to protect American interests and promote national sovereignty. The withdrawal is also seen as a reflection of the administration’s "anti-woke" agenda, which seeks to roll back progressive policies and promote a more conservative worldview.
The Implications for US Foreign Policy
The withdrawal from international organizations has significant implications for US foreign policy and the country’s role in the world. The move reflects a shift away from international cooperation and the protection of vulnerable groups, and towards a more assertive and nationalist approach to foreign policy. As Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff and homeland security adviser, noted, "We live in a world, in the real world, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power." This approach has been criticized for promoting a "might is right" approach to international relations, which could have far-reaching consequences for global stability and security. The withdrawal also raises questions about the US commitment to upholding international law and protecting vulnerable groups, and whether the country will continue to play a leadership role in addressing pressing global challenges.
