Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States

Trump Says US Will Terminate Relationship With WHO Today (cnbc.com) 307

President Donald Trump announced Friday that the United States is will be cutting ties with the World Health Organization later today. From a report: "China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year," Trump said during a press conference. Trump has repeatedly criticized the WHO's response to the coronavirus, which has hit the U.S. worse than any other country, amid scrutiny of his own administration's response to the pandemic. Earlier this month, Trump threatened to permanently cut off U.S. funding of the WHO. In a letter, he said that if the WHO "does not commit to major substantive improvements within the next 30 days, I will make my temporary freeze of United States funding to the World Health Organization permanent and reconsider our membership in the organization." On Friday, Trump said WHO "failed to make the requested a greatly needed reform" and the U.S. "will be today terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization and redirecting those funds to other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs."
UPDATE (6/13/2020): Though Trump promised "immediate" action, two weeks later, Ars Technica reported there was "nothing to indicate that Trump has followed through on his plan."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Trump Says US Will Terminate Relationship With WHO Today

Comments Filter:
  • by AutodidactLabrat ( 3506801 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @02:11PM (#60121904)
    will just kill Americans without prior warning
    There goes another Trumpertantrum!!
    • by Pimpy ( 143938 )

      Warnings were given to the US long before WHO took a formal position, the US simply chose not to do anything. You do not need the WHO to warn you of a pending pandemic - simply monitoring the developing situations in other countries is enough to take reactionary measures. Now if you want to make an informed decision instead of a reactionary one, or actually make some sort of contribution to the global effort to fight the pandemic, a more participatory involvement would be needed, and this is where bodies li

    • will just kill Americans without prior warning
      There goes another Trumpertantrum!!

      Wow, an actually insightful FP that might lead to a productive discussion. Where did Slashdot go right?

      Sorry, but I must now wager that the trolls' sock puppets are about to mod you [AutodidactLabrat] to hell and oblivion. I better quote you for a bit of extra visibility, eh? (At least as of the time of starting this writing, there was only the one comment.)

      I was thinking whether it should be described as a temper tantrum or lashing out. The "stable genius" is increasingly desperate to change the subject, b

  • Not how this works (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nidi62 ( 1525137 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @02:18PM (#60121924)

    "China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year," Trump said during a press conference.

    Well, if China didn't before, they do now. Well done. Just keep on reducing the US's global influence. I'm sure that won't come back to bite us in any way.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by enigma32 ( 128601 )

      That's fine. Why should the US pay for a Chinese mouthpiece? That money can be better spent elsewhere.

    • by liquid_schwartz ( 530085 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @02:41PM (#60122066)

      "China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year," Trump said during a press conference.

      Well, if China didn't before, they do now. Well done. Just keep on reducing the US's global influence. I'm sure that won't come back to bite us in any way.

      I'd trade less influence for not having to carry the world. Far simpler to just mind our own business and fix our own problems. It's not like the world appreciates our "help". Let them see how much better China is to deal with.

      • by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )

        "China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year," Trump said during a press conference.

        Well, if China didn't before, they do now. Well done. Just keep on reducing the US's global influence. I'm sure that won't come back to bite us in any way.

        I'd trade less influence for not having to carry the world. Far simpler to just mind our own business and fix our own problems. It's not like the world appreciates our "help". Let them see how much better China is to deal with.

        If the river a mile away is about to flood its banks, it's easier, cheaper, and more effective to help your neighbors build up the river bank than wait for water to reach your house before you start laying down sandbags. World problems will eventually reach our doors, I'd rather we fixed them before they get close.

        • "China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year," Trump said during a press conference.

          Well, if China didn't before, they do now. Well done. Just keep on reducing the US's global influence. I'm sure that won't come back to bite us in any way.

          I'd trade less influence for not having to carry the world. Far simpler to just mind our own business and fix our own problems. It's not like the world appreciates our "help". Let them see how much better China is to deal with.

          If the river a mile away is about to flood its banks, it's easier, cheaper, and more effective to help your neighbors build up the river bank than wait for water to reach your house before you start laying down sandbags. World problems will eventually reach our doors, I'd rather we fixed them before they get close.

          Except that the situation now is that the people on the riverbank are doing little to nothing and thinking don't worry about it, the guy a mile away will fix it. We are paying for way more than our share and that needs to be fixed. Trump pops off at the mouth a lot but this is one area where his lack of eloquence is hitting a truth. We're carrying much of the world and it needs to be rebalanced. Is pulling out extreme? Probably. But ignoring it as all previous administrations have done is as bad or wor

      • I'd trade less influence for not having to carry the world. Far simpler to just mind our own business and fix our own problems. It's not like the world appreciates our "help". Let them see how much better China is to deal with.

        Ya, thank God we don't have to live on this World with everyone else; we can just go on all by ourselves ... -- oh, wait.

  • Fools (Score:3, Insightful)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @02:25PM (#60121964)

    Trump got rid of the pandemic response team and brought about this pandemic .. now he's ditching the WHO what do you think will happen long term? It's not going to help us find emerging asymptomatic viruses. When Ebola happened in 2014 and the first round of SARS happened in 2003 we stopped it by helping out right when it started .. instead of saying "it's their problem lol" and allowing it to spread. Ebola was more contagious than COVID-19 we controlled that. The original SARS (2003) was just as contagious but we reacted much faster and it essentially went away. Trump bamboozled himself into this messed up response. He got tricked, and he tricked himself too.

    • It just isn't what Trump wants it to be. Trump is merely spending the remaining amount of Congress approved funding on other international organizations, and it is only $60M. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funds more than that to the WHO. And the President can't actually defund the WHO. It is within the powers of Congress to set the budget. Trump is risking a second impeachment with this near meaningless maneuver, which looks almost identical to the Ukraine blackmail he pulled. By the end of January
    • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @02:38PM (#60122050)

      Trump got rid of the pandemic response team

      Fake news - in fact Trump did not get rid of that team. [washingtonpost.com]

      and brought about this pandemic

      So a wet market in China and bats had nothing to do with it, is what you are saying...

      Funny how Trump Haters are the most anti-science people of all in the end. They just make up everything.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        Fake news - in fact Trump did not get rid of that team. [washingtonpost.com]

        That's not a news story, it's an Op-Ed piece.

        Here's another opinion piece, also in the Washington Post, painting quite a different picture:

        I ran the White House pandemic office. Trump closed it. [washingtonpost.com]

        • by Some Guy I Dont Know ( 6200212 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @06:00PM (#60122966)

          The two op-eds are not contradictory, if you actually read them.

          The first one correctly describes what actually happened: The new office Obama created and staffed was shut down, and the politically appointees fired. The professional bureaucrats with expertise in disease and bioweapons were transferred to an existing office (headed by the man that wrote this first oped).

          The second correctly describes that the author was there - and lost his job, because he was one of the political appointees who had no purpose when the multiple existing offices doing the same thing were merged.

          The net result, of course, is different than what you and the OP are trying to claim, though - that there was no office dedicated to handling pandemics and bioweapons. In fact, there was one, it was well staffed, and it dated back to the Bush Administration.

    • Re:Fools (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @03:02PM (#60122194) Homepage Journal

      Ebola was more contagious than COVID-19 we controlled that.

      Wait, what? Ebola was spread exclusively by touching the bodily fluids of an infected person. Basically, up until the person starts bleeding out every orifice, it likely isn't contagious, and after that, most people are so horrified that they stay the heck away. The combination of those two factors made Ebola one of the least contagious diseases we've seen in a long time.

      • SARS was also not as contagious - but don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. **Also doesn't mean this was all handled well

        • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          It's not entirely clear whether SARS was truly less contagious or we just got lucky and didn't happen to have any outbreaks in areas that were more susceptible because of ultra-high density. But it was probably less contagious.

  • by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @02:31PM (#60122004) Journal
    idiot is destroying.
    • Ok, I have to ask; are you really that excited for Biden? Or are you excited to vote against Trump?

      There's a difference, and I really want to talk to someone who is excited to vote for Biden.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        Oh, I'm very excited to vote for Joe Biden. Mainly because he isn't Donald Trump. That's all you need to know about this election. If you don't like people voting against things, I guess get rid of voting. Oh, that's right. That's what the Republicans are trying.

        • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

          This is the correct answer.

          There is nothing more exciting or more motivating than voting for Trump's opponent, so absolutely ecstatic to vote for Biden. It has nothing to do with who would make the best president, nor does it ever, it has only to do with purging the government of grifters and crime bosses for international organized crime.

      • I would have been excited to vote for any number of other candidates on the Democratic side in the upcoming election. Biden is one drool rag away from being comatose at this point. He's not just the least exciting, he's the least everything that the Democrats had. No clear policy. No clear action plan. Simply, "I was there before with Obama, except when he fucked up, then I wasn't really there at all."

        So I'm not excited to vote for Biden. And I'm not excited to vote against Trump, though I do think he

  • questionable logic (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bjdevil66 ( 583941 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @02:34PM (#60122026)

    Yeah, China had corrupted them and had them eating out of their hands. But is withdrawal the right path here? Can the WHO be reformed with political will and the pressure/clout the USA can wield? If not, what will replace its role on the world's stage? Is there a better option out there?

    And regardless of that, if the rest of the world doesn't follow along and condemn the WHO and walk away, we just end up looking like a tantrum-throwing loser and saying, "I quit". And any past American money/resources thrown at the WHO will all be Chinese-controlled. China comes out with a big win and takes control.

    As a country, the United States can't act impulsively with every big decision we make. It's gambing... and I think President Trump may have lost with this one.

    • Sorry, who cares if China fully controls the entity dedicated to getting health advice out to the world, that already was politicizing for China?

      Does the WHO not give health advice / donations if you don't pay in ? Aside from things coming out of China, which apparently weren't going to be done right anyway, what's the difference?

      Libya seems to be getting donations / advice from the WHO on covid without paying much in, USA and Libya can be brothers for the next pandemic.

    • by JBMcB ( 73720 )

      There was a lot of talk about reforming the WHO back when the last big ebola outbreak happened in 2014. So far, it seems like not a lot has changed. At some point you have to cut your losses. Maybe wind down the current incarnation of the WHO and spin up another one?

      • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        No, because this assumes that the problem is with WHO.

        Republicans have, for some time now, had a "me first" anti-globalist strategy that includes destroying US leadership in worldwide coalitions. It has nothing to do with WHO, it has to do with the selfish nationalistic bigotry of the party. Trump want to destroy the UN and NATO as well, not to "wind down" for objective benefit and replace with "another one", but to render everything everywhere a banana republic. There are two ways to be king of the hill

  • Pay US$40M and demand the same level of lies bullshit and cover ups...
  • by ebrandsberg ( 75344 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @02:51PM (#60122136)

    Per the WHO, it didn't look like the USA had paid for last year, or the invoiced amount for this year (https://www.who.int/about/finances-accountability/funding/AC_Status_Report_2020.pdf?ua=1). Maybe there is a reason why China had so much influence? That said, this is just a blame game. Trump dropped the ball, and he wants someone's head to roll.

  • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @03:02PM (#60122192)

    the coronavirus, which has hit the U.S. worse than any other country,

    A disease is going around. It kills 2 people from a family of 4. It kills 3 people from a family of 10. Which family is hit worse?

    To properly compare rates of something happening to groups with different populations, you need to normalize by dividing by the population. The family of 4 has an incident rate of 50%. The family of 10 has an incident rate of 30%. So the family of 4 is hit worse, despite suffering fewer fatalities.

    Look at the world virus stats [worldometers.info] and click on "Deaths / 1M population" twice to sort it by the death rate. The U.S. is currently the 12th worst-hit at 315 deaths per million. Belgium, Spain, the UK, Italy, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Ireland have all been hit worse. And if you subtract the tri-state area (NY, NJ, CT, 45091 deaths), the rest of the U.S. is only at 136 deaths per million, which would tie it with Portugul at 21st. Doing better than Switzerland and Canada.

    California is a particularly good example of how your perception can be screwed up if you incorrectly look at just the raw number of deaths. It's currently the "4th worst-hit" state if you look at raw deaths. But California is the country's most populous state. If you look at its death rate, it's only at 102. It's doing better than Germany (103), which has been widely lauded for how well it's handling the virus.

    • It's also pointless to compare deaths at any one instant. The virus didn't enter all countries simultaneously, and the rate of spread in the earliest stages is partly a matter of luck.

      • Especially with how much of this country is nowhere near an International airport and there are quite a few pockets of people who simply don't get out much. The spread is actually much slower in this country per capita than it would be otherwise.

  • This is how he gets things done. He pulls out, WHO misses all the money that left with it, WHO makes reforms that don't parrot a Chinese narrative, and begs the US to return.
  • Wow. How incompetent must the people he assigned to work with the WHO be if they start with such a massive influence difference in their favor and somehow screw it up. This is the problem with purging a department and brining in newbies.. utter inability to wield power like a professional and then dealing with the embarrassment of utter failure.
  • I fully expected to see something like this. I mean, I recently read something about him threatening exactly this. I don't know if China is heavily influencing the WHO or not, but I do know the blame of how this virus spread so quickly around the world had to have more at fault than one country and a world organization.

    It took quite a while for many countries to react. And with good reason, lack of experience dealing with this situation not being a small one. But even with the restrictions in place, ind

  • by ZipprHead ( 106133 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @03:20PM (#60122298) Homepage

    The Trump administration wants to paint the WHO as a scapegoat for the coming election. It also wants to paint China as an enemy as part of his campaign strategy. Both smart moves for an election year.

    That said it's unfortunate that we have a system that values re-election over actually whats doing what is right. The world is truly a worse place because of this man. History will judge him and his family poorly.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Sad as it is, I completely agree. Trump is not playing to the smart part (well, minority) of the US voters. He knows he has absolutely no chance with them. He is playing to the morons and like most con-men, he is doing it ignoring whatever collateral damage he does. There will be a huge price to pay for that.

  • All the money countries have spent and a global pandemic is what we got. The fundamental idea of having an organisation will always stand, but the people we've put in charge didn't deliver on it. One can demand for Trump to resign, but the same is true for the WHO leadership.

  • by RuudNL ( 6186070 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @04:51PM (#60122740)

    A Dutch late night snow made an item about the WHO's relationship with China. It's online here with English subtitles:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

    It's actually pretty enjoyable to watch and it is illuminating. Long story short: something fishy does seem to be going on. Of course Trump as always overreacts and uses this story to distract from how weakly he's handled COVID-19 in the US and to distract from his absence of any leadership or taking any responsibility. But there is something there that should be looked at regardless of this.

    Just shouting, terminating a relationship doesn't help, maybe the next president can take care of this, if no other country steps up before then.

The fancy is indeed no other than a mode of memory emancipated from the order of space and time. -- Samuel Taylor Coleridge

Working...