Revision summary
A U.S. exit from WHO cuts funds, programmes and legitimacy and pushes health into minilateral and philanthropic patches. COVID-19 already showed weak IHR compliance, earmarked budgets and vaccine inequity. Reimagining means unearmarked dues, a fairer pandemic accord, One Health and regional manufacturing. China-filling-the-gap politics and anti-UN populism are part of the shock, not a side issue. India needs both sovereignty over health data and a standing rules forum for the next pathogen.
Model answer
Introduction
- The World Health Organization is the UN system’s health steering wheel: norms, International Health Regulations, naming of emergencies, and a thin budget that still shapes what poorer states can do. A United States withdrawal — threatened in the first Trump term, reversed under Biden, and reopened as high politics in 2025 — is therefore not a clerical notice. It is a shock to global health as a public good.
Body
Far-reaching impacts
The United States has been among WHO’s largest funders, especially through voluntary earmarked money. Exit shrinks outbreak surveillance, polio and HIV programmes, and the political cover for COVAX-style equity. It also invites a China-centred narrative of filling the chair, which Washington itself fears. During COVID-19, vaccine nationalism and fights over origin-tracing already damaged trust. A second American walkout, even if legally staggered, tells others that health multilateralism is optional. States then hedge with minilateral deals, philanthropic vertical funds, and national stockpiles — a patchwork that fails at the next novel pathogen.
Withdrawal also hits legitimacy. WHO’s power is mostly expert and convening, not coercive. If the largest Western democracy treats it as an enemy of sovereignty, anti-vaccine and anti-UN politics elsewhere gain a script. Developing countries that used WHO as a shield in TRIPS-waiver and pandemic-treaty talks lose a forum.
Why reimagine, not only mourn
COVID-19 exposed late alerts, a weak IHR (2005) compliance machinery, chronic underfunding of assessed contributions, and a governance board that mixes science with P5 geopolitics. Africa’s vaccine-manufacturing gap and India’s later vaccine diplomacy both showed that WHO cannot be a charity window for the North. Reimagining means: higher unearmarked dues so the Director-General is not a grant-chaser; a functioning pandemic accord with real benefit-sharing of pathogens and products; One Health links to FAO and UNEP on spillover; regional manufacturing hubs; and a dispute path that does not collapse when great powers sulk.
- India’s interest is dual: protect sovereignty over data and traditional medicine claims, and keep a rules forum so that the next lockdown is not a rich-state cartel. A Global South-sensitive WHO is part of the same argument as a Global South-sensitive globalisation. Salvage is possible without pretending Geneva can replace national public health. The organisation must become harder to exit and fairer to stay in.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD U[US withdrawal] --> M[Money and legitimacy] U --> G[Geopolitical vacuum] R[Reimagine WHO] --> F[Assessed finance] R --> E[Equity and IHR] R --> O[One Health]
Conclusion
U.S. withdrawal punches WHO’s purse and prestige. Reimagining — finance, equity, IHR teeth, One Health — is how the rest of the membership keeps a global health agenda from becoming a great-power leftover.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Global South-sensitive model of globalization would prevent the danger emanating from overcentralized globalization. Discuss
Next question on this syllabus topic (2025 · Q3(c)). View answer →
-
Can WHO work without the United States?
It can limp. Polio, emergencies and norms would shrink. Other donors cannot fully replace U.S. money or FDA-linked scientific weight.
-
Is a pandemic treaty the whole reform?
No. Treaties without finance and without pathogen- and product-sharing will repeat 2020. Budget reform is as important as legal text.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2025 · Q3(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Global South-sensitive model of globalization would prevent the danger emanating from overcentralized globalization. Discuss -
2025 · Q4(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
Latin America has made moderate success in countering US-led global economic order by framing various organizations emphasizing regional sovereignty, economic integration and alternative development. Discuss -
2024 · Q6(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss the potential role that India could play as the leader of the Global South in realising the goal of establishing a new international economic order in the 21st century.
More from this topic
Q4(a) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
Latin America has made moderate success in countering US-led global economic order by framing various organizations emphasizing regional sovereignty, economic integration and alternative development. Discuss
India and the Global South
Latin America answered U.S. economic primacy with Mercosur, ALBA, UNASUR, CELAC, Banco del Sur and Brazil’s BRICS role. The intellectual root is ECLAC, Prebisch and dependency: unequal exchange and the need for regional policy space. Success is moderate: some intra-trade, a diplomacy without Washington in CELAC, and diversified China markets. The dollar, IMF programmes and U.S. financial cycles still dominate crises. Cyclical politics and a reluctant Brazilian paymaster explain the ceiling.
Q3(c) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Global South-sensitive model of globalization would prevent the danger emanating from overcentralized globalization. Discuss
India and the Global South
Overcentralised globalisation concentrates rules, capital and the dollar in Northern centres and exports risk south. A Global South-sensitive model shares voice, WTO policy space, climate finance and digital/food buffers. G20, Voice of Global South, AU membership of G20 and BRICS are incomplete pluralising moves. Trump tariffs show the core can revolt against its own system; Southern grievance is not the only crack. The aim is embedded liberalism with a wider membership, not autarky.
Q6(c) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss the potential role that India could play as the leader of the Global South in realising the goal of establishing a new international economic order in the 21st century.
India and the Global South
NIEO sought fairer trade, finance, technology and voice for developing countries; it stalled in the late 1970s. India’s potential is to convene the South (G20, Voice of Global South), defend WTO food space, and offer generics and digital public infrastructure. Quad-plus-BRICS seating lets India translate between South and G7. China is the capital competitor; India is not a global paymaster; neighbourhood gaps weaken the claim. Realistic leadership is coalition and agenda-setting toward a less overcentralised order.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.