Share
Array
(
[0] => WP_Post Object
(
[ID] => 16632
[post_author] => 5
[post_date] => 2026-01-22 20:39:49
[post_date_gmt] => 2026-01-22 20:39:49
[post_content] => On January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration announced its intent to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO).
The decision set in motion a process that included a one-year transition period, a legal requirement that the U.S. settle any outstanding dues and a series of operational steps still being worked through behind the scenes.
Upon the announcement, some observers interpreted the move as a step back from multilateral engagement. A closer reading of events, however, points to something more nuanced. The Administration’s stated objectives for U.S. global health engagement – speed, accountability, early warning and results – reflect the very mandate WHO was created to fulfill.
Detecting and Managing Disease Outbreaks
With a physical presence on the ground in 166 countries and 194 Member States, WHO provides the U.S. with an unparalleled opportunity for global disease surveillance. While bilateral engagement on health can be beneficial, WHO’s centralized network facilitates expedient, coordinated information sharing and response that ensure global health threats are stopped before they reach U.S. shores.
With a physical presence on the ground in 166 countries and 194 Member States, the WHO network provides the U.S. with an unparalleled opportunity for global disease surveillance.
[caption id="attachment_16640" align="alignright" width="450"]
Response team in Kigali, Rwanda, December 2024; Photo credit WHO[/caption]
Just months ago, we saw the benefits of this system in the response to a Marburg outbreak in Rwanda.
In September 2024, the Rwandan Ministry of Health confirmed the presence of the highly contagious disease, which causes internal bleeding and organ failure and for which there is no approved vaccine or treatment. Thanks to WHO investments in preparedness and the rapid deployment of WHO experts to the region, Rwandan officials contained the spread, achieving one of the lowest Marburg mortality rates on record and stopping a global health threat before left the country.
Expanding the Market for U.S. Medical Innovation
WHO's prequalification system is a critical market-access engine for U.S. vaccine and medical manufacturers, streamlining regulatory pathways, speeding global uptake of American innovations and enabling rapid, large-scale deployment of lifesaving treatments when crises hit.
Without WHO prequalification, U.S. medical innovators must navigate a patchwork of country-by-country approvals, slowing market entry, delaying adoption and inhibiting the global reach of American technologies. The prequalification system also enables emergency authorization during health crises, getting treatments from lab to patients when time matters most.
As the world leader in medical research and innovation, U.S. engagement in WHO’s prequalification system ensures American breakthroughs continue to anchor the global health marketplace and support the continued health of American communities and businesses.
The WHO prequalification system enables rapid emergency authorization during health crises, ensuring new treatments move quickly from lab to patients when time matters most.
Ending the Scourge of Polio
With a 99.9% decrease in global wild polio cases since 1988, the world is standing on the one-yard line of eradicating this highly contagious and devastating disease. The last remaining cases of wild polio continue to plague isolated, hard-to-reach communities in Afghanistan and Pakistan, areas where WHO can operate and others, like the U.S., cannot.
By working with WHO on our shared goal of eradicating polio, the U.S. is investing in its own global health future. We saw the benefits of this cooperation previously with the successful eradication of smallpox in 1980. When the U.S. works alongside WHO to mitigate and ultimately end the spread of a disease overseas, Americans are protected at home.
When the U.S. works alongside WHO to mitigate and ultimately end the spread of a disease overseas, Americans are protected at home.
Shaping the Future of WHO
With a new WHO Director-General set to take office in 2027, the U.S. has a timely opportunity to engage constructively and help shape the organization’s future. Member State input remains a valuable part of this selection process. As a long-standing leader, major donor and advocate for reform, the U.S. is best positioned to advance global health priorities by remaining at the table and influencing the path forward.
An Argument for Engagement
Filling gaps in prevention and treatment, expanding access to cutting-edge medicines and medical technologies and fostering an interconnected global health surveillance network are the very core of WHO’s mission. Given its global presence and access to the hardest-to-reach places, WHO has the unique ability to complement U.S. initiatives and further U.S. global health goals.
That's why American engagement with WHO matters – and why we cannot afford to walk away.
[post_title] => Working with WHO is a Win for the U.S.
[post_excerpt] => U.S. health priorities – from disease surveillance to expanding markets for American medical innovation – are core work of the World Health Organization, underscoring why engagement with WHO advances American health, security and economic interests.
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => closed
[ping_status] => closed
[post_password] =>
[post_name] => working-with-the-who-is-a-win-for-the-us
[to_ping] =>
[pinged] =>
[post_modified] => 2026-01-22 20:50:53
[post_modified_gmt] => 2026-01-22 20:50:53
[post_content_filtered] =>
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://betterworldcampaign.org/?p=16632
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[post_mime_type] =>
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw
)
[1] => WP_Post Object
(
[ID] => 16583
[post_author] => 5
[post_date] => 2026-01-22 15:37:33
[post_date_gmt] => 2026-01-22 15:37:33
[post_content] => Peter Yeo, President of the Better World Campaign, released the following statement in response to the Administration’s announcement that it will disengage from the World Health Organization:
For more than seven decades, the United States and the World Health Organization (WHO) have successfully worked to eradicate deadly infectious diseases, coordinate disease surveillance, respond to urgent health emergencies, and promote standards that protect and improve the lives and health of Americans and people around the globe.
Today’s announcement is a setback for our nation and for global health. We must be at the table where global health decisions are made. WHO is good for Americans, and American involvement with WHO is good for the world.
We must be at the table where global health decisions are made. WHO is good for Americans, and American involvement with WHO is good for the world.
In the past year, WHO has made the tough decisions America demanded. They slashed budgets and made bold operational reforms. WHO’s work covers the globe, yet their annualized budget is nearly five times smaller than the budget for the Cleveland Clinic.
WHO has spent decades building an unparalleled disease detection network in all corners of the world. There is no organization in the world with their breadth and depth of knowledge.
There is no organization in the world with the breadth and depth of knowledge of WHO.
We urge the Administration to engage constructively with WHO – including by maintaining technical communication channels and by continuing to work through WHO networks, working groups and task forces to combat infectious diseases that threaten our nation.
Continued engagement will be particularly important in the coming year as WHO elects a new Director-General. Collaboration between the U.S. and WHO will lead to a safer country and a healthier world.
We urge the Administration to engage constructively with WHO.
[post_title] => America Must Continue Working with the World Health Organization
[post_excerpt] => Continued U.S. engagement with the World Health Organization strengthens America’s health security, saves lives and ensures the United States remains a leader in shaping a safer, healthier world.
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => closed
[ping_status] => closed
[post_password] =>
[post_name] => america-must-continue-working-with-the-world-health-organization
[to_ping] =>
[pinged] =>
[post_modified] => 2026-01-22 16:08:41
[post_modified_gmt] => 2026-01-22 16:08:41
[post_content_filtered] =>
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://betterworldcampaign.org/?p=16583
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[post_mime_type] =>
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw
)
[2] => WP_Post Object
(
[ID] => 16585
[post_author] => 5
[post_date] => 2026-01-20 15:55:42
[post_date_gmt] => 2026-01-20 15:55:42
[post_content] => As 2025 came to a close, the U.S. and the United Nations announced a $2 billion humanitarian assistance partnership with the potential to reshape how America delivers life-saving aid to millions of people worldwide.
The announcement followed a turbulent year for the humanitarian community. An Executive Order paused most U.S. foreign assistance, while Congress moved to claw back funding and lawmakers sought greater oversight of aid programs.
Among issues at the center of those discussions was the need to protect the integrity of aid delivery, particularly the risk of so-called “aid diversion” – when money, food or supplies are intercepted by armed groups or diverted from their intended recipients.
Diversion poses serious strategic and humanitarian risks. When assistance is stolen or misused, it can prolong conflict, finance violence and deprive vulnerable communities of the support they urgently need.
With the UN responsible for delivering assistance in the world’s most complex environments, a critical question emerges: how is the UN system strengthening safeguards to mitigate diversion and ensure that U.S.-supported humanitarian aid reaches those it is intended to help?
OCHA: The UN’s Coordination Hub
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) sits at the center of these efforts. OCHA supports UN agencies and more than 1,500 humanitarian partners in delivering aid to people in crisis worldwide. Today, humanitarian needs are estimated to exceed 300 million people, even as resources are projected to reach less than two-thirds of those. Ensuring aid is delivered transparently, efficiently and without diversion is core to its mandate.
That work begins well before aid reaches the ground. Ahead of deployment, OCHA relies on analysts from fields as diverse as logistics and health to procurement and even unexploded ordnance safety, to conduct extensive country-specific risk assessments, flagging threats like how robberies or natural disasters could block delivery. These assessments provide a roadmap for the planning of safe, accountable aid distribution.
OCHA’s planning does more than improve the odds of successful deliveries by UN agencies – it strengthens the entire humanitarian ecosystem, including the trusted local partners who are often the real heroes of this work. By sharing metadata with community-based organizations, and in turn receiving hyperlocal insights from those on the ground, OCHA helps bridge global oversight with lived, local knowledge. The result is a smarter, more responsive humanitarian system – one that delivers aid more effectively because it is informed by the communities it serves.
OCHA’s planning does more than improve the odds of successful deliveries by UN agencies – it strengthens the entire humanitarian ecosystem.
Accountability at Every Step
To move plans from paper to practice, OCHA tracks aid from transport through post-delivery. Tools such as biometric identification, fixed delivery schedules and third-party oversight provide near real-time visibility into where assistance is and whether disruptions are occurring. This includes cutting-edge satellite tracking in partnership with UN Satellite Centre (UNOSAT).
Post-distribution, where much interception often occurs, includes individual survey and feedback mechanisms that help verify that aid reached intended recipients, as well as independent audits by the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services and implementing partners inside and outside the UN system. For cash programs, analysis of local market activity offers an added check on how funds are spent to see how assistance is circulating back into the community and what goods are in demand.
Together, these guardrails allow cash assistance to move quickly and flexibly while maintaining strong protections against diversion. (For more on cash assistance, read our latest on the rise of cryptocurrency in aid delivery.)
Bonus: some of OCHA’s tracking dashboards and maps are also open-source, adding an extra layer of transparency to the system.
Safeguards
When major issues do occur, OCHA pauses operations immediately and launches an investigation in coordination with local and regional authorities.
Diversion is treated as seriously as any obstruction to humanitarian access because it strikes at a core UN principle: neutrality. Deliberate attacks on aid workers, denial of access to civilian populations and, yes, diversion of assistance by any actor all trigger the same response – pause, assess and investigate.
Aid resumes only after partners on the ground demonstrate that strict compliance criteria have been met and that the conditions enabling diversion are no longer present. This process protects future deliveries and strengthens OCHA’s planning and risk management for operations ahead. It also bolsters trust of local populations that keeps humanitarian workers safe so they can keep doing the good work of keeping civilians safe.
Trusted Results
In 2024, OCHA ranked first among UN entities in the global Aid Transparency Index and fourth overall among all aid organizations worldwide. That achievement is notable for any institution – let alone one coordinating relief across the world’s most dangerous crises, with more than 1,000 NGOs on its roster, amid shrinking budgets and record humanitarian need.
And it helps explain why, as the U.S. reassessed how it delivers humanitarian assistance, it turned to OCHA: an organization built to manage complexity, enforce accountability and deliver aid with the transparency and integrity American taxpayers expect.
[post_title] => How the UN Ensures Integrity and Transparency in Aid Distribution
[post_excerpt] => At a moment of historic humanitarian need, the U.S. is looking to OCHA’s globally recognized model to deliver aid with impact, integrity and speed.
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => closed
[ping_status] => closed
[post_password] =>
[post_name] => how-the-un-ensures-integrity-and-transparency-in-aid-distribution
[to_ping] =>
[pinged] =>
[post_modified] => 2026-01-20 18:28:49
[post_modified_gmt] => 2026-01-20 18:28:49
[post_content_filtered] =>
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://betterworldcampaign.org/?p=16585
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[post_mime_type] =>
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw
)
[3] => WP_Post Object
(
[ID] => 16566
[post_author] => 5
[post_date] => 2026-01-16 15:19:53
[post_date_gmt] => 2026-01-16 15:19:53
[post_content] => Note: Throughout our resources, the Better World Campaign often refers to “SFOPS,” shorthand for the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs subcommittee. At the start of the 119th Congress, the House Appropriations Committee renamed this panel the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs (NSRP) subcommittee. The Senate Appropriations Committee has retained the SFOPS title.
In early January, lawmakers released the FY26 National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs (NSRP) bill – the spending package that shapes how the United States invests in diplomacy, foreign assistance and international organizations.
On January 14, the bill passed the House by a strong bipartisan vote of 341–79 and is now headed to the Senate for consideration.
As the Better World Campaign noted at the bill’s release, the outlook for America’s global engagement was encouraging. Bipartisan, bicameral support for multilateral foreign assistance was on display in the final package.
While overall funding is lower than FY24 levels, Congress took decisive steps to restore U.S. dues to the United Nations and funding for UN peacekeeping operations – reinforcing America’s commitment to leadership on the world stage.
Because these “minibus” appropriations packages can be hard to decode, here’s a plain-English breakdown of what made the cut.
The 10,000 Foot View
Overall, the bill provides $50 billion for U.S. international engagement, including $9.4 billion for global health. It does come in at about 16% less than FY’25 levels, with voluntary funding for UN agencies slimmer and humanitarian assistance down compared to recent years. However, the funding outlined in the bill preserves core U.S. treaty obligations to the UN system, especially the regular budget and peacekeeping. Those payments keep the lights on at UN headquarters and support peace operations that help stabilize conflict zones.
Specifically, here’s where the UN-related money goes:
- $1.39 billion for Contributions to International Organizations (CIO)
- $1.23 billion for Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA)
- $335.4 million for Peacekeeping Operations (PKO)
- $339 million for International Organizations and Programs (IO&P)
Together, these accounts support U.S. participation in institutions that shape diplomacy, humanitarian response and global security.
U.S. Dues Are Back
The Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) account is how the U.S. pays its assessed dues to the UN regular budget, UN specialized agencies and dozens of other global bodies, including NATO, the Organization of American States (OAS) and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
This year’s $1.389 billion is about 10 percent lower than recent levels but sufficient to meet most U.S. treaty obligations. The main exceptions are agencies the Administration has already withdrawn from, such as UNESCO and WHO.
One important new twist – the bill allows the Secretary of State to shift up to $466.5 million from a “National Security Investment Programs” account into UN dues and peacekeeping if it helps advance reforms in the national interest.
Congress also dropped a proposal that would have defunded the entire UN Secretariat over conditions tied to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the main aid agency in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan that provides health and education services to roughly six million Palestine refugees. An existing U.S. funding ban on UNRWA remains in place through March 25, 2027.
To keep tabs on how the money is used, the Department of State must brief lawmakers within 30 days on spending plans, unpaid dues, the national security impact of nonpayment and any plans to withdraw from UN bodies. Many of these oversight steps align with the UN80 reform efforts already underway at the UN.
Of note, Congress does not publish a line-by-line breakdown of how much each organization receives.
Peacekeeping, Protected
Peacekeeping is where the U.S. helps fund missions that prevent conflicts from spiraling out of control.
For FY26, the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA) account is funded at $1.23 billion – nearly the same as last year and enough to meet U.S. obligations under the legal 25 percent cap. Even better, $615 million of that funding can be used over two years, giving Congress more flexibility to spend the money and not have it rescinded.
Bottom line – U.S. influence in peacekeeping is protected and the risk of losing voting rights due to unpaid dues can be avoided.
Stability, Region by Region
Related to peacekeeping, the Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) account supports regional security missions and logistical assistance in places essential to American security.
For FY26, it receives $335.4 million. That’s less than the FY24 and FY25 enacted totals but significantly more than the President’s FY26 request.
One notable shift is that Congress did not lock this money to Somalia as it has in the past. Instead, it gave the Administration flexibility to use the funds for the UN-authorized Gang Suppression Force in Haiti, as well
Same bucket. More options.
Voluntary, But Vital
The International Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account is how the U.S. supports agencies like UNICEF, the UN Development Programme (UNDP), the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), with whom the U.S. has just partnered for major humanitarian aid reform.
Both the House and the Administration tried to eliminate this account entirely. Congress said no, restoring it at $339 million. That’s still about 22 percent lower than recent levels but it keeps the U.S. engaged across key UN agencies.
Lawmakers directed the Department of State to fund agencies “consistent with prior years” and made one point clear – UNICEF should continue receiving support at past levels.
The bill also sets aside $32.5 million for the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), with a legal escape clause, and requires the Department of State to show Congress how it plans to spend the money.
The goal is transparency without micromanagement.
Where Cuts Hit Hardest
The Administration reshaped humanitarian funding into a new International Humanitarian Assistance account and reduced overall funding. Congress agreed. For FY26:
- $5.4 billion for International Humanitarian Assistance
- $100 million for the Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance fund
That’s roughly $3 billion less than what the U.S. provided for key humanitarian response accounts in recent years. And in a world beset by crises, that matters.
Some Strings Attached
The bill also comes with a long list of conditions on UN funding:
- Ties some bilateral aid decisions to how countries vote at the UN, including support for Taiwan’s observer status
- Withholds 10 percent of UN funding until certain requirements around transparency, accountability, and other standards are met
- Prohibits funding for the UN Human Rights Council unless certain conditions are met
- Pushes the UN to stop buying from Russian vendors
- Requires justification for funding organizations that deny U.S. auditors access
Many of these provisions echo past Congresses but continue to shape how and when UN funding is released.
An Arrears Reality Check
There’s one important reality to keep in mind: the U.S. still has major outstanding financial obligations to the UN.
While many other Member States have already paid their 2025 dues, the U.S. has not yet provided any funding to cover its share of the UN regular budget and has paid only about 30 percent of its peacekeeping assessments.
Those arrears affect UN operations and, over time, significantly limit U.S. influence inside the system. Passage of the FY26 bill would be a meaningful step toward addressing those shortfalls, upholding U.S. treaty commitments and advancing U.S. interests.
Key Takeaways
In a fraught political environment, the bill is good news. The UN was not defunded. Peacekeeping was backed. Core U.S. commitments remained and Congress, in a resoundingly bipartisan fashion, voted for paying our fair share.
At the same time, humanitarian aid is leaner, voluntary funding is tighter and oversight rules are stronger than ever.
So yes – there’s work to do. More advocacy. More education. More reform.
But the U.S. is showing up. And in a world where global problems don’t respect borders, that still matters. A lot.
In a fraught political environment, the bill is good news. The UN was not defunded. Peacekeeping was backed. Core U.S. commitments remained and Congress, in a resoundingly bipartisan fashion, voted for paying our fair share.
[post_title] => Unpacking the FY26 SFOPS/NSRP Bill: What’s In, What’s Out and What’s at Stake
[post_excerpt] => Passed with strong bipartisan support, the FY26 SFOPS bill restores U.S. funding for the UN and peacekeeping while reshaping humanitarian aid and strengthening oversight of international spending. Read our analysis.
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => closed
[ping_status] => closed
[post_password] =>
[post_name] => unpacking-the-fy26-sfops-nsrp-bill-whats-in-whats-out-and-whats-at-stake
[to_ping] =>
[pinged] =>
[post_modified] => 2026-01-16 20:11:20
[post_modified_gmt] => 2026-01-16 20:11:20
[post_content_filtered] =>
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://betterworldcampaign.org/?p=16566
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[post_mime_type] =>
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw
)
)
U.S. health priorities – from disease surveillance to expanding markets for American medical innovation – are core work of the World Health Organization, underscoring why engagement with WHO advances American health, security and economic interests.
Continued U.S. engagement with the World Health Organization strengthens America’s health security, saves lives and ensures the United States remains a leader in shaping a safer, healthier world.
At a moment of historic humanitarian need, the U.S. is looking to OCHA’s globally recognized model to deliver aid with impact, integrity and speed.
Passed with strong bipartisan support, the FY26 SFOPS bill restores U.S. funding for the UN and peacekeeping while reshaping humanitarian aid and strengthening oversight of international spending. Read our analysis.
Blog, Budget, Global Health
01/22/2026
Blog, Humanitarian Affairs
01/20/2026
Blog, UN Explained
01/13/2026
Budget, Statement
01/12/2026
Sign up for our monthly newsletter
