United States Announces Withdrawal From More Than 60 International Institutions

One year after the start of his second term, US President Donald Trump announced the country's withdrawal from several international organisations, funds, treaties and conventions. The announcement, made official through a Presidential Memorandum released on 7 January, emphasises the termination of participation and funding for 66 multilateral initiatives in which the country was involved. Of these, 31 are linked to the United Nations (UN) system, while the remaining 35 are not.

The measure is a direct result of Executive Order 14199, entitled “Withdrawing the United States from and Ending Funding to Certain United Nations Organizations and Reviewing United States Support to All International Organizations,” issued in February 2025. This declaration entrusted Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in collaboration with the United States Representative to the United Nations, Mike Waltz, to conduct a comprehensive review of the country's role in all international institutions and agreements involving the United States, assessing which ones were in line with national interests and which ones were not. Following this review, in a statement issued by the White House, Rubio classified the 66 institutions disclosed as “wasteful, ineffective, and harmful.” 

Most of the organisations on the list are, in fact, non-governmental organisations operating internationally, subsidiary bodies of the UN, or UN programmes. The United States remains a member of the UN and most of its specialised agencies.

The Trump administration argues that the organisations from which it withdraws represent the interests of external actors, contrary to national objectives and capable of threatening the sovereignty, freedom, and prosperity of the United States. In the document, Rubio states that these entities are often dominated by progressive ideologies, citing “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) mandates,” “gender equity campaigns” and “climate orthodoxy.” The measure reinforces the government's anti-globalist trend, following previous moves such as withdrawing from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Paris Agreement. 

While the US Executive justifies the decision as a way to protect American taxpayers' resources — aiming to end the period of “billions of dollars diverted to foreign interests at the expense of the people” — the United Nations warns of a possible financial collapse. Currently, the UN estimates that the United States' debt to the organisation amounts to US$ 2.2 billion, which corresponds to 95% of the total owed by all member states. This amount refers to the combination of annual contributions for 2025 and 2026, which have not yet been paid. 

Stéphane Dujarric, spokesperson for Secretary-General António Guterres, reiterated that the payment of mandatory contributions to regular and peacekeeping budgets is a “legal obligation under the UN Charter for all Member States.” The two-year delay in contributions puts the US in a position of technical default, which may limit its voting power in certain instances, as well as paralyse humanitarian missions. 

In response to the austerity scenario, Guterres proposed a 15.1% reduction in the UN's annual budget for 2026. According to the Secretary-General, the measure is a “pragmatic response to evolving fiscal realities Member States expectations,” reinforcing that the organisation's success depends on each country's fulfilment of its financial obligations.

The simultaneous withdrawal of the United States from numerous institutions has significant political impacts on the world stage. Initiatives aimed at political isolationism, such as the current one, increase the possibility of the collapse of multilateralism on the international stage and challenge existing global governance structures by relativising the legitimacy of international organisations and accentuating historically constructed power asymmetries at the international level. 

Although international organisations are made up of states, they have the autonomy to perform functions that isolated political units are unable to perform as efficiently and comprehensively. Such institutions play a central role in coordinating policies, producing technical standards, developing research and disseminating scientific data. These initiatives promote a greater degree of cooperation between states, especially in scenarios of global crises — financial, health, or social.

Thus, the departure of a country central to global politics, such as the US, would create a vacuum of legitimacy. The impact is especially severe on organisations focused on resolving issues with broad international social impact, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women).