Trump decides to withdraw America from 66 international organizations: Details and repercussions
In a remarkable development reflecting the US administration's determination to move forward with its "America First" policy, US President Donald Trump signed a presidential memorandum formally withdrawing the United States from 66 international organizations, arguing that these entities no longer serve the national interests of the United States.
Details of the presidential decision
A White House statement explained that the new memorandum requires all federal departments and agencies to cease all forms of engagement and funding with a large number of organizations. The decision encompasses 35 organizations not affiliated with the United Nations, as well as 31 UN agencies and bodies. This move is part of a comprehensive review being conducted by the Trump administration regarding the effectiveness of international alliances, which the president believes drain the country's resources without providing commensurate political or economic benefits.
Political context: The "America First" doctrine
This decision is not an isolated event, but rather part of a long series of actions taken by Trump since assuming office aimed at diminishing the traditional American role as the "world's policeman" or a major funder of international institutions. Trump has consistently criticized multilateralism, favoring direct bilateral relationships that he believes give Washington greater leverage in negotiations. This view is based on the conviction that many international organizations have become bloated bureaucracies that either oppose American interests or benefit from American financial largesse without offering support for Washington's political positions.
Historical background and precedents of withdrawal
Historically, the Trump administration has been marked by high-profile withdrawals that have sparked global controversy, from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Paris Climate Agreement to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the Human Rights Council. These precedents make the current memorandum a natural extension of an approach aimed at dismantling commitments that the current administration considers "restrictions" on American national sovereignty.
Expected repercussions locally and internationally
This decision is expected to send shockwaves through international diplomacy. Financially, the United States is the largest donor to many UN agencies, and cutting this funding could paralyze their relief, development, and international monitoring operations. Politically, observers believe that the vacuum left by Washington could be filled by other rising international powers such as China and Russia, potentially reshaping the global order in ways that may not be in the West's long-term interest. Domestically, the decision may be welcomed by the conservative base, which favors reducing foreign spending and focusing on domestic issues.
