Return to Answer

At the risk of being obvious, Trump's letter clearly delineates his reasons.

Both Trump and WHO have made mistakes in regard to this crisis. At the time when China was in full lockdown and European countries were declaring local quarantines, Trump expected it all to just disappear.

That said, WHO has been of limited value in response to this particular public health crisis. The quarantine and distancing measures were implemented on behalf of individual nations. Even mostly-favorable sources acknowledge WHO's mistakes. Both Trump and the WHO underestimated the threat.

There is a difference, though: the president's job is to judge the priorities, including choosing between lives and money. Kafkaesque as the 2016 election was, the US did choose what appeared to be the lesser of two evils, and national presidents do get to choose what to prioritize (in this case, the economy over safety). The WHO, on the other hand, has a singular mission, in which it has failed.

What the US gains is a way to make a statement. The money in question is fairly inconsequential for the US budget, but it's significant for the WHO. Exercising the ability and the will to control that funding allows Trump to affect the WHO's priorities.

At the risk of being obvious, Trump's letter clearly delineates his reasons.

Both Trump and WHO have made mistakes in regard to this crisis. At the time when China was in full lockdown and European countries were declaring local quarantines, Trump expected it all to just disappear.

That said, WHO has been of limited value in response to this particular public health crisis. The quarantine and distancing measures were implemented on behalf of individual nations. Even mostly-favorable sources acknowledge WHO's mistakes. Both Trump and the WHO underestimated the threat.

There is a difference, though: the president's job is to judge the priorities, including choosing between lives and money. Kafkaesque as the 2016 election was, the American voters did choose the lesser of two evils, at least in their opinion. National presidents get to choose what to prioritize; in this case, Trump prioritized the economy over safety, rightly or not. The WHO, on the other hand, has a singular mission, protecting the public health, in which it has failed.

What the US gains is a way to make a statement. The money in question is fairly inconsequential for the US budget, but it's significant for the WHO. Exercising the ability and the will to control that funding allows Trump to affect the WHO's priorities.

At the risk of being obvious, Trump's letter clearly delineates his reasons.

Arguably, Trump has screwed up worse than the WHO did. At the time when China was in full lockdown and European countries were declaring local quarantines, Trump was tweeting about how it all was going to just disappear.

That said, WHO has been of limited value in response to this particular public health crisis. The quarantine and distancing measures were implemented on behalf of individual nations. Even the most favorable sources acknowledge WHO's mistakes.

  Both parties are at blame here. Both Trump and the WHO grossly underestimated the threat, leading to significant loss of life and greater economic losses than would've been incurred by an early hard quarantine response.

The president's job is to judge the priorities, including choosing between lives and money. Kafkaesque as the 2016 election was, the US did choose what appeared to be the lesser of two evils (to the voters at the time), and national presidents get to choose what to prioritize. The WHO, on the other hand, has a singular mission, in which it has failed.

What the US gains is a way to make a statement. The money in question is fairly inconsequential for the US budget, but it's significant for the WHO. Exercising the ability and the will to control that funding allows Trump to affect the WHO's priorities.

At the risk of being obvious, Trump's letter clearly delineates his reasons.

Both Trump and WHO have made mistakes in regard to this crisis. At the time when China was in full lockdown and European countries were declaring local quarantines, Trump expected it all to just disappear.

That said, WHO has been of limited value in response to this particular public health crisis. The quarantine and distancing measures were implemented on behalf of individual nations. Even mostly-favorable sources acknowledge WHO's mistakes. Both Trump and the WHO underestimated the threat.

There is a difference, though: the president's job is to judge the priorities, including choosing between lives and money. Kafkaesque as the 2016 election was, the US did choose what appeared to be the lesser of two evils, and national presidents do get to choose what to prioritize (in this case, the economy over safety). The WHO, on the other hand, has a singular mission, in which it has failed.

What the US gains is a way to make a statement. The money in question is fairly inconsequential for the US budget, but it's significant for the WHO. Exercising the ability and the will to control that funding allows Trump to affect the WHO's priorities.

At the risk of being obvious, Trump's letter clearly delineates his reasons.

Arguably, Trump has screwed up worse than the WHO did. At the time when China was in full lockdown and European countries were declaring local quarantines, Trump was tweeting about how it all was going to just disappear.

That said, WHO has been of extremely limited value in response to this particular public health crisis. Certainly not harmful, but nothing would have been different if WHO had not existed. The quarantine and distancing measures were implemented on behalf of individual nations, not the WHO. Even the most favorable sources acknowledge WHO's mistakes.

Both parties are at blame here. Both Trump and the WHO grossly underestimated the threat, leading to significant loss of life and greater economic losses than would've been incurred by an early hard quarantine response.

The president's job is to judge the priorities, including choosing between lives and money. Kafkaesque as the 2016 election was, the US did choose what appeared to be the lesser of two evils (to the voters at the time), and national presidents get to choose what to prioritize. The WHO, on the other hand, has a singular mission, in which it has failed.

What the US gains is a way to make a statement. The money in question is fairly inconsequential for the US budget, but it's significant for the WHO. Exercising the ability and the will to control that funding allows Trump to affect the WHO's priorities.

At the risk of being obvious, Trump's letter clearly delineates his reasons.

Arguably, Trump has screwed up worse than the WHO did. At the time when China was in full lockdown and European countries were declaring local quarantines, Trump was tweeting about how it all was going to just disappear.

That said, WHO has been of limited value in response to this particular public health crisis. The quarantine and distancing measures were implemented on behalf of individual nations. Even the most favorable sources acknowledge WHO's mistakes.

Both parties are at blame here. Both Trump and the WHO grossly underestimated the threat, leading to significant loss of life and greater economic losses than would've been incurred by an early hard quarantine response.

The president's job is to judge the priorities, including choosing between lives and money. Kafkaesque as the 2016 election was, the US did choose what appeared to be the lesser of two evils (to the voters at the time), and national presidents get to choose what to prioritize. The WHO, on the other hand, has a singular mission, in which it has failed.

What the US gains is a way to make a statement. The money in question is fairly inconsequential for the US budget, but it's significant for the WHO. Exercising the ability and the will to control that funding allows Trump to affect the WHO's priorities.