On Thursday, the United States is poised to take the unprecedented step of formally exiting the World Health Organization, an act of geopolitical defiance that public health experts warn will leave both America and the world more vulnerable to pandemics. However, the dramatic “walkout” is being contested at the door, with a $260 million question hanging in the air: will the U.S. pay the dues it legally owes before leaving, and has it effectively locked itself out of the global health intelligence network it helped build?
President Donald Trump triggered the one-year withdrawal process on his first day back in office in 2025. As that deadline expires, the U.S. faces a direct legal and financial ultimatum from the WHO: settle all outstanding fees for 2024 and 2025, as required by U.S. law, or its departure will be considered in “clear violation.” Lawrence Gostin, a leading global health law expert, stated bluntly, “Trump is highly likely to get away with it,” highlighting the lack of an enforcement mechanism but underscoring the breach of norms.
The Door Slam? A Budgetary Crisis and a Staff Exodus
The U.S. exit is not a symbolic gesture; it is a body blow to the WHO’s operational capacity. As the agency’s largest historical funder, contributing roughly 18% of its budget, Washington’s withdrawal has sparked an immediate internal crisis. The WHO has already been forced to cut its senior management team in half, slash budgets across all departments, and will shed approximately a quarter of its global staff by mid-2026.
This evisceration of resources means the WHO’s ability to monitor emerging diseases, coordinate vaccine responses, and fight endemic threats like malaria and polio will be severely diminished. “The U.S. withdrawal from WHO could weaken the systems and collaborations the world relies on to detect, prevent, and respond to health threats,” said Kelly Henning of Bloomberg Philanthropies, framing the exit as an act of global sabotage.
But Is the Door Locked? The Murky Future of Collaboration
The central mystery of the headline—whether the U.S. has “slammed the door locked”—refers to the uncertain future of technical and data-sharing collaboration. The WHO states it has continued sharing information with U.S. agencies over the past year, but what happens after Thursday is “unclear.” Will American epidemiologists retain access to the WHO’s global outbreak alert system? Will the CDC be cut off from vital flu strain data collected worldwide?
This ambiguity creates a perilous scenario. The U.S. could find itself medically isolated, forced to rely on slower, bilateral agreements for health intelligence while a weakened WHO struggles to fill the $260 million hole in its budget. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus made a last-ditch plea: “I hope the U.S. will reconsider. Withdrawing from the WHO is a loss for the United States, and it’s a loss for the rest of the world.”
A ‘Quick Return’ Is Not in the Cards
Despite these dire warnings, there is no political off-ramp in sight. Bill Gates, whose foundation is a major WHO funder, told Reuters at Davos, “I don’t think the U.S. will be coming back to WHO in the near future.” The WHO’s executive board will discuss the fallout in February, but the agency has no power to compel payment or stop the withdrawal.
The U.S. has walked out. The question now is about the consequences of that exit. By refusing to pay the legally required fees, it has chosen a path of maximum confrontation, potentially burning a bridge rather than leaving a door ajar. Whether this strands America outside during the next global health emergency—unable to access the very networks it built—will be the ultimate test of whether this walkout was a strategic gambit or a catastrophic self-inflicted wound.
