Tears welled up in the Gambian mother’s eyes as she feared her child might be the next victim of what was then still a mysterious disease. In a country where medical resources are already scant, an unknown illness was hospitalizing children with severe kidney damage, with a staggering 85% mortality rate.
When President Trump signed the executive order on his inauguration day to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), I couldn’t help but feel a profound sense of loss and of danger — not just for the global community but for America itself.
WHO stepped in
In The Gambia, over three months, 78 children presented with life-threatening kidney injuries. The cause baffled local health officials, who had never encountered such an outbreak. That’s when WHO stepped to and launched a global investigation to track down the source of this mysterious illness.
I watched as they activated emergency response protocols, setting in motion a chain of actions that would lead to the source of the danger. WHO’s efforts saved countless lives — not just in The Gambia but in other nations as well.
WHO’s Emergency Medical Team collaborated with local health officials, treating hundreds of patients and working to figure out the source of the sickness. The investigative partnership identified the source — four cough syrups contaminated with ethylene and diethylene glycol and e.coli.
That discovery led Gambia to warn citizens not to take the syrups but take pills, and to ban the importation and sale of the four syrups, made by a company in India. It also informed WHO’s global health alerts to prevent similar tragedies in other countries where the syrups were sold.
In a span of few days, WHO had mobilized a large team on the ground and pooled funds from various programs to tackle this issue head-on. This is why institutions like WHO are indispensable: they provide a synergy and collaboration that no single nation can match.
No other could provide the swift, coordinated action necessary. None can gather and the data nor enable coordinated action the way WHO can.
Many Americans do not see the value of the WHO, viewing it as a “globalist” entity. But for much of the world, it’s a lifeline, providing life-altering work in the world’s most vulnerable regions.
Consider the organization’s most lauded successes: the global vaccination programs that led to the eradication of smallpox in 1979 and a 99% reduction in polio infections in recent decades. These achievements have saved countless lives and billions of dollars in healthcare costs worldwide, including in the United States.
Need for reform
However, I must also point out that President Trump isn’t wrong when he says the WHO needs reform.
The executive order listed four reasons for the withdrawal: WHO’s “mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic that arose out of Wuhan, China, and other global health crises, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states,” and the U.S.’s “unfairly onerous payments.”
These reflect Trump’s campaign statements that WHO is “nothing more than a corrupt globalist scam” which “disgracefully covered the tracks of the Chinese Communist Party.” His charges are not accurate, of course, but like any large organization, WHO has its flaws and areas for improvement.
But withdrawing from the organisation isn’t the solution. it’s abandoning our global responsibility and putting potentially millions of lives at risk. The US should be leading the charge in improving the WHO, not turning its back on it.
By withdrawing, we not only abandon those in need but also put ourselves at risk. We lose access to crucial global health information, making us more vulnerable to emerging infectious diseases. In an age where a virus can travel from a remote village to a major city in a matter of hours — including diseases like the resurgent tuberculosis — this isolationist policy is not just morally questionable. It’s dangerously short-sighted.
I’ve stood in cholera-stricken villages in Southern Africa and COVID-ravaged communities in West Africa. I’ve seen the WHO at the forefront of these crises, with American expertise and resources playing a crucial role in saving lives.
There’s one other benefit to America to consider: healthy countries make better trade partners. Support for WHO serves our national interest.
The next crisis
To withdraw now, when the world needs us most, is cowardly and an abdication of our responsibility as a global leader.
Instead, let’s roll up our sleeves and do what Americans do best — lead by example. Let’s work to make the WHO more efficient, more transparent, and more effective. Let’s use our influence and resources to shape a global health system that can respond even more swiftly and effectively to the next crisis.
Make no mistake — there will be a next crisis. And when it comes, whether it’s in a remote village in Africa or a bustling city in Asia, it will threaten us all.
I implore our leaders and fellow citizens: Let us lead in reforming the WHO, not abandon it. Our health, our security, and our humanity depend on it.
Monik Bhatta, a graduate of the University of Pittsburgh, has worked in international development for a decade and is currently a student at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. His previous article was “America must use its soft power.”
