World Health Organization: U.S. Should Remain and Reform from Within

The president’s statement on May 29 that he is “terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization” came as no surprise. For over two months, the U.N. agency faced criticism for its handling of the coronavirus pandemic and accusations of covering for the Chinese government’s early failures to deal with the crisis.

But as former State Department lawyer Harold Koh and Georgetown law professor Lawrence Gostin noted in a Foreign Affairs essay last week, withdrawing from the WHO is more complex than just making a statement in the Rose Garden. Pulling the United States out of the organization, as required by the law approving U.S. membership in it, requires a year’s notice and payment of outstanding dues to the organization.

About the Author

Jimmy Quinn

Jimmy Quinn is the former national security correspondent for National Review.

Featured Tags

Manage following

Coronavirus

WHO

The president’s statement on May 29 that he is “terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization” came as no surprise. For over two months, the U.N. agency faced criticism for its handling of the coronavirus pandemic and accusations of covering for the Chinese government’s early failures to deal with the crisis.

But as former State Department lawyer Harold Koh and Georgetown law professor Lawrence Gostin noted in a Foreign Affairs essay last week, withdrawing from the WHO is more complex than just making a statement in the Rose Garden. Pulling the United States out of the organization, as required by the law approving U.S. membership in it, requires a year’s notice and payment of outstanding dues to the organization.