United States and The World Health Organization

After Trump decided that The United States of America should leave the WHO (World Health Organization) many people have wondered if The United States really needs WHO. Although nothing tragic happened in the years between Donald Trump removing the United States out of the World Health Organization and Biden reinstating us in the organization I would argue that the World Health Organization and the United States need each other. 

The World Health Organization has been an important organization in the world since its creation in 1948. WHO works worldwide to promote health and prevent diseases such as the COVID infection from spreading. Furthermore, the organization focuses on preventing emergencies and providing aid to countries that have been hit by disasters, as well as protecting human rights based on health issues. The reason The World Health Organization needs the United States is primarily due to the funding that they provide the organization. The United States annually contributes about 400 million dollars to WHO which allows it to have the workers and reach that it does. If the United States were to stop providing financial support, or lessen substantially, the WHO would not be able to operate at the level it does today. With the United States being considered the global hegemon, it is expected to provide this financial aid to support developing countries with less protection.

Although it seems the World Health Organization needs the United States more than The United States needs them, the World Health Organization provides the same support to the United States as it does for any other country in the world. It has been prominent in stopping the spread of the Covid-19 virus as best as it can despite the comments from former president Trump. Furthermore, the World Health Organization has helped the United States for years in disaster relief programs as well as human rights violations. Although it seemed that The United States was doing well during the time it was out of the World Health Organization, it is generally considered mutually beneficial that they remain a part of it.



Comments

  1. Chris KApril 24, 2022 at 6:03 PM

    I think that the World Health Organization would be better off without being so reliant on the United States. When looking at the response to COVID, the United States has done one of the worst jobs of any first world country, with over a million deaths. I think the WHO would be better off using the United States as a source of information, but when it comes to decision making, there should be more countries' voices heard. Do you think that a system where more countries share the funding and decision making for WHO would be better or worse?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hayden Groves April 25, 2022 at 7:50 AM

    I agree with your statements, considering that both the United States and WHO mutually benefit one another, but, as you stated, the WHO who is more dependent on Americas support can create problems. Similar to Chris's thoughts, I think it would be beneficial not only for the WHO but also for other countries if the organization did not have to be so dependent on the United States for making decisions because there are third world countries whose input would probably be more helpful rather than simply a first world country. Especially since the United States is a global hegemon, so the dire needs of other third world countries may not be heard or considered as much if America is making many of the decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kevin KlukowiczApril 25, 2022 at 6:34 PM

    While I do acknowledge my peers' comments, I too believe that the United States should remain a prominent leader of the WHO. When discussing the resources the WHO utilizes to proceed with its operations to combat different pandemics such as COVID-19 and promote health, it is important to think about who mainly finances these actions. If the WHO were to branch off from American influence what would that look like? Would other countries have to step up their financial contributions and donations to cover the money lost from less spending on the WHO? I do agree that other countries should have more of a say, it requires more action on their part in order to justify their opinions and equal standing in the WHO.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ICC articles

When it comes to the arguments on the International Crimes Court, I think the article presented by Daniel Abebe is the most convincing to me. After reading the article presented right before it, (the article by Anne Marie Gotez), it seemed that maybe the best way to fix the problems within the ICC would be to give them more funding and allow them to give more financial aid to the victims of these war crimes. Furthermore, she said that the funding for this program had been below a million and it was not enough for the ICC to function effectively. However, after reading the article presented by Abebe it stated that since 2002, the ICC has spent over a billion dollars. If in 20 years they were able to spend this mass amount of money, then there is no way that they are being underfunded. Moreover, Abebe states that the funding for the ICC is over 100 millions dollars a year, which is an incredible quantity of money for people to be asking for more money to be pumped into the system. Abeb...
Read more

Global Justice and Nationalism

  The Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy writes in brief the philosophical values and traditions regarding global justice, how it is defined by their standards, and how it is played out within other nation states. I will be focusing mainly on section 2.3, which discusses the duties of compatriots versus non-compatriots, and goes on to further understand the differences between the two, such as how state actors and non-state actors view one another and potentially interact. While most have viewed nationalism in a positive light, nationalism goes beyond respect for national sovereignty, this ideology can perpetuate negative attitudes towards other countries and sometimes even make one states citizens seem morally superior than another citizen who is belonging to another state (Gillian, 2015). There is a debate among egalitarian theorists discussing whether or not concerns with equality should be confined to state members or be granted to every individually globally (Gillian, 2015). ...
Read more

The United States and the World Trade Organization

     Recently there has been large debates regarding the implications regarding the possibility of the United States potentially pulling out of the World Trade Organization. While some politicians and economists supported this idea and have argued that it would be beneficial for the US to leave this organization, the US would have to face some serious consequences that would be hard to bounce back from, not only domestically, but globally since other countries could potentially be positively affected if this deal were to go into effect. The debate is still ongoing, but the consequences and risks of this action, especially during an economic crisis from the covid-19 pandemic, are too great to ignore and continue to be in pursuit of departing from the World Trade Organization.       There are several strong arguments that support my claims that leaving would present more bad than good. First, the US being involved in the world trade organization adds gre...
Read more