President Donald Trump’s deep cuts to foreign aid and plans to quit the UN body that coordinates efforts to combat disease are already splintering a global approach to public health strained by a once-in-a-century pandemic.
Picking up the pieces is Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’ job.
Facing the loss of his biggest funder when the U.S. officially withdraws in January — America’s contribution was $640 million in 2023, the most recent year for which data is available — the World Health Organization’s director-general is trying to appeal to Trump. He’s fundraising and has launched the largest downsizing in the body’s history. He’s also warning the world that retreating from health cooperation right after a pandemic swept the globe doesn’t make any sense. He says the sudden aid cuts this year have cost lives.
“If donors or others also see that what they give is no charity and it’s a security for everybody, I think we’ll be in a better situation,” Tedros told POLITICO.
At the same time, he’s also found a silver lining that sounds like something he and Trump could agree on: America’s aid cuts are pushing countries that have depended on U.S. funding to become more self-reliant.
The first African head of the WHO, Tedros has led the organization since 2017, including through the turmoil of Covid, two mpox outbreaks and yearslong negotiations on an international agreement aimed at improving the world’s response when the next pandemic comes. This year he’s had to reorganize the WHO leadership and let go of some 600 people out of roughly 10,000 employees after losing U.S. funding.
Tedros outlined for POLITICO his efforts to address Trump’s complaints of “inappropriate political influence” at the WHO and “onerous payments,” and explained how he’s engaging Trump officials to get the administration to reconsider its withdrawal.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
How does the world move forward after the funding cuts and U.S. withdrawal?
Solidarity is important, because unless we support each other, viruses could get an advantage. It’s not charity. By investing in it, countries are protecting themselves.
On top of that, though, self reliance is also important, and each and every country should invest in health.
If countries take ownership, I see a better future.
Covid-19 has killed more people than any war in recent memory. We have to protect ourselves from a common enemy that can strike any time. It’s a matter of when, not if.
Trump, Republicans and many global health experts say some countries have become dependent on the U.S. and the cuts will force them to become self-reliant. So were the cuts a good thing?
It’s a good thing and it’s a bad thing.
It’s a bad thing because people are dying.
It’s a good thing for the long term, because countries are now waking up and saying: ‘OK, I have to mobilize domestic resources, and I have to cover the expenses for the health system.’
Of course, there is the immediate impact. If there was a transition, it would have been better to avoid the impact of the service cuts now in terms of morbidity or mortality.
How have you engaged with the Trump administration and how did that go?
We have done that formally, informally, because we think informal is more effective. And we ask for meetings, but for reasons they don’t tell us, it hasn’t happened yet.
I’m not saying the door is closed.
We’re in touch with [Health Secretary] Bobby Kennedy. He helped us in evacuating kids from Gaza. The president supported it. There are some kids who came here and many to other countries, especially kids with cancer. I would like to thank the president for the peace deal and also for helping kids with cancer in the evacuation. We have already reached more than 300 kids.
Kennedy has said the WHO needs “radical reform.” Have you talked to him about what reforms he wants?
We don’t know what kind of reform they want, but the U.S. says other countries should pay and they want to pay less. We agree.
The WHO wants the U.S. and other major donors to pay less because we want the burden to be shared.
We started the finance reform in 2017. In 2022, our member states, including the U.S., agreed to increase the assessed contributions by 50 percent. The largest increase in the past was 3 percent.
And that helps the WHO prevent shocks like these in the future, and also to be more independent.
And that, I think, is what the U.S. also wants, for the WHO to be independent.
So if that’s what they want, then we’re doing it. So is this a good reason to leave? No.
Trump administration officials have accused the WHO of being too close to China and helping it cover up the origins of Covid. Have you had conversations with Kennedy or other Trump officials about it?
It’s outright wrong.
I don’t know if people know that China is not happy with the position that we have on Covid’s origins, because our position is that all hypotheses are on the table, including spillover and lab leak.
This position is very similar to the United States’. Based on science and evidence, actually, that’s the conclusion you can have.
But when people don’t want to see what exactly are the facts and are interested in spreading misinformation and disinformation, what can you do?
Are you worried other countries could follow the U.S. out of the WHO?
I’m not worried that much.
There are good reasons to stay, even for the U.S.
