What will the withdrawal of the US from the World Health Organization tell us about the outlook for the United States during Trump’s second term in office?

In the summer of 2020, 15 recognized leaders in US public health gathered to author an article in The Lancet—one of the world’s most eminent medical journals—decrying Donald Trump’s intention to withdraw the US from the World Health Organization, a decision that was later reversed by President Biden before it took effect.

According to both houses of congress, if the US wants to withdraw from treaties, it has to give the World Health Organization a year’s notice, but if Trump wants to do so, he wouldn’t have to get congressional approval.

What happens next depends on reactions of other countries and organizations such as the Bill and Gates Foundation, the World Bank, and the Vaccine Alliance according to the chief medical officer of the Global Viruses Network. Germany responded by quadrupling their contributions to more than $1 billion after the US cut its contribution to the WHO to $680 million. The government of the nation agreed to double their contributions in order to improve sexual and reproductive health and address the rise of non-communicable diseases.

However, Gostin and others are particularly concerned about the impacts of a US withdrawal on the country’s ability to manage the ongoing threat of infectious diseases. While the WHO has a lot to offer, such as advice on essential drugs and public policies on tobacco and drug use, its most important task is coordinating an international response to potentially problematic new diseases, such as bird flu.

It remains unclear how much weight many of the orders will carry, but policy specialists who spoke to Nature say that they clearly mark the direction Trump intends to steer the United States during his second term in the White House.

The United States would be pulling out of the Paris climate agreement, similar to when Trump first took office, in one order. Citing both national security concerns and the impact of high energy prices that “devastate” American citizens, Trump also declared a ‘national energy emergency’ at home, an action that could enable his government to greenlight fossil-fuel-based energy projects.

The president says his emergency order would allow US agencies to identify energy projects where federal regulations and protections are holding up progress. Agencies would then be authorized to move more quickly to approve projects, including through the use of “any lawful emergency authorities”.

Mark Maslin, an Earth- system scientist at University College London, says that the economy is more important to Trump than him. It is now easier to invest in renewable energy sources such as solar and wind than it used to be. that means that investments in those technologies will continue.

Although the Paris agreement will continue to function without the United States — the world’s second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases — many scholars worry that a US exit will inevitably reduce pressure on other countries to act. This follows Earth reaching its highest temperature on record last year, and scientists say that countries must increase efforts to curb emissions if they are to achieve the global goal.