The recent announcement from the Trump administration withdrawal from 66 international organizations was received with a mixture of alarm and applause. While the main issue signals a dramatic retreat from the world stage, a closer look reveals a more nuanced and perhaps insidious strategy. This move is less a wholesale abolition of the United Nations system and more a targeted pruning of the multilateral vine aimed at destroying specific branches of global cooperation that the administration deems contrary to its interests. While the immediate financial impact may be less severe than feared, the long-term consequences for the UN and the rules-based international order are profound.
At first glance, the withdrawal appears to be a sweeping rejection of global engagement. The list of targeted entities is long and diverse, ranging from the well-known UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to more obscure bodies such as the International Lead and Zinc Study Group. However, if Eugene Chen astutely noted, the reality is more complex. The vast majority of UN-related entities on the list are not independent international organizations, but rather subsidiary bodies, funds and programs of the UN itself. The government is not withdrawing from the UN Charter for the time being, but rather selectively withdrawing funding and withdrawing from the parts of the UN system that it finds objectionable.
This selective approach reveals a clear ideological agenda. The targeted entities are overwhelmingly focused on issues that the Trump administration has long disdained: climate change, sustainable development, gender equality and human rights. The list includes the UN’s main development departments, the Ministry of Economic and Social Affairs; its main gender entity, UN Women; and a large number of agencies involved in peacebuilding and conflict prevention. The participation of the UN regional economic commissions, which play a crucial role in promoting regional cooperation and development, is particularly significant. This isn’t just a cost saving; it is a deliberate attempt to dismantle the architecture of global cooperation in areas that do not fit the government’s narrow, nationalist worldview.
The decision to remain a member of the UN’s specialized agencies, such as the World Health Organization (from which the government has already announced its withdrawal in a separate action) and the International Atomic Energy Agency, is equally revealing. This is not a sign of a renewed commitment to multilateralism, but rather a cold, calculated decision based on a narrow definition of US national security interests. The government has made clear that it sees these agencies as useful tools to counter the influence of a rising China. This “à la carte” approach to multilateralism, where the US chooses which parts of the system to support based on its own geopolitical interests, is deeply undermining the principles of collective security and universal values that underpin the UN Charter.
What should be done then? The international community cannot afford to simply watch as the UN system is eroded from within. A concerted effort is needed to limit the damage and reaffirm the importance of multilateral cooperation.
First, other Member States must act to fill the financial and leadership gap left behind by the United States. This will require not only increased financial contributions, but also a renewed political commitment to the UN’s work on sustainable development, climate action and human rights. Second, Civil society organizations and the academic community play a crucial role in monitoring the impact of the US withdrawal and advocating for the continued relevance of affected UN entities. Finally the The UN itself must do a better job of communicating its value to a skeptical public. The organization must go beyond bureaucratic jargon and technical reports to tell a compelling story about how its work makes a real difference in the lives of people around the world.
The Trump administration’s latest move is a stark reminder that the postwar international order can no longer be taken for granted. It is a call to action for all who believe in the power of multilateralism to tackle our shared global challenges. The UN may be a flawed and imperfect institution, but it remains our best hope for a more peaceful, prosperous and sustainable world. We must not allow it to wither on the vine.
Related articles by this author:
Venezuela and the UN proxy war moment
The danger of a transactional worldview
The choice is still clear: renew the UN Charter at the age of 80
Jordan Ryan is a member of the Toda International Research Advisory Council (TIRAC) of the Toda Peace Institute, Senior Consultant at the Folke Bernadotte Academy and former Assistant Secretary General of the UN with extensive experience in international peacebuilding, human rights and development policy. His work focuses on strengthening democratic institutions and international cooperation for peace and security. Ryan has led numerous initiatives to support community organizations and promote sustainable development in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. He regularly advises international organizations and governments on crisis prevention and democratic governance.
IPS UN Office
© Inter Press Service (20260119132043) — All rights reserved. Original source: Inter Press Service
#UNs #Destructive #Vine #American #Withdrawal #Global #Governance