Did the US propose reforms to the WHO before deciding to leave?

Yes, the United States had proposed a series of reforms aimed at improving the World Health Organization’s transparency and accountability before announcing its intention to withdraw.

The US proposed reforms focused on increasing transparency in decision-making processes, enhancing the independence of the organization, and improving efficiency in responding to global health crises.

The United States announced its intention to leave the World Health Organization in July 2020.

The US decided to leave the WHO citing dissatisfaction with the organization's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and a perceived lack of significant reforms.

The response from the WHO varied, with some member states supporting the call for reforms, while others were more cautious. The WHO itself acknowledged the need for improvements but highlighted ongoing efforts rather than specific reform proposals.

The US stated that the reforms were necessary to address what it viewed as systemic failures and biases within the organization, especially highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Some countries shared concerns raised by the US and supported calls for reforms, while others emphasized the need for global cooperation and viewed the US approach as counterproductive.

The US withdrawal threatened significant funding shortfalls for the WHO, as the US was one of its largest contributors. This raised concerns about resource availability for global health initiatives.

Yes, under the Biden administration, the US rejoined the WHO in January 2021.

The US had conditioned its continued involvement on the WHO implementing specific reforms, particularly those aimed at preventing future pandemics through improved preparedness and response.

The withdrawal required a one-year notice period and involved negotiations regarding financial commitments and ongoing health initiatives.

The US contributed hundreds of millions of dollars annually to the WHO budget, so its departure posed a significant risk to the funding of various global health programs.

Yes, the US reforms included calls for more equitable funding mechanisms and changes in governance structures to ensure more democratic and effective decision-making.

No, several other countries and international bodies called for reforms, though the specific nature and urgency of these calls varied.

Many global health experts criticized the decision, arguing it would weaken global health security and cooperation during a critical time.

The US was one of the largest contributors, providing mandatory assessed contributions and additional voluntary funding for specific health programs.

The US criticized the WHO's response to the COVID-19 crisis, alleging it was too slow and overly influenced by certain member states, which fueled calls for reform.

Yes, the decision strained diplomatic relations and was criticized by several allies and international partners who valued the US's role in global health leadership.

The funding was significantly reduced, and commitments to ongoing initiatives were uncertain pending finalization of the withdrawal process.

Rejoining the WHO signaled a renewed commitment to multilateralism and global collaboration on health issues, though discussions on reforms remained part of the ongoing dialogue.