The World Health Organisation (WHO) exists to fight deadly diseases, coordinate pandemic responses, and improve global health. But instead of focusing on these core priorities, it has expanded into lifestyle regulations—pushing sugar taxes, alcohol restrictions, and vaping bans. With Italy’s deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini threatening to exit the WHO, and the organisation already in financial trouble after the United States pulled its funding, Europe needs to step up to issue a public demand for accountability and refocusing the WHO on its original mission.
The WHO has a staggering budget of $6.83 billion for its 2024-25 fiscal year, which should be spent on genuine health threats where governments need coordination and where state action can make a real difference, like on communicable diseases. However, instead of investing in research, vaccine development, and emergency preparedness, the WHO has focused on controlling personal lifestyle decisions—increasing taxes on tobacco and alcohol, for example—taking the organisation away from its founding purpose. This has raised widespread doubts about its effectiveness and role in global health governance.
The WHO’s inefficiency was never more visible than during the COVID-19 pandemic, which revealed critical gaps in preparedness, such as delayed responses and an absence of decisive measures at crucial early stages. The fact that two separate institutions—UNAIDS and the Global Fund—were set up reveals the long-standing lack of confidence in the WHO to address the world’s most pressing health concerns.
Donald Trump’s re-election is a huge blow for the WHO. The United States has traditionally been a major contributor to both the WHO’s emergency appeal fund and its broader budget, For the current two-year period, the United States provided about 34% of the funding available for health emergencies. In the past, its contribution has been as high as 50%. However, that financing could be at risk. In his first stint in the White House, Trump moved to cut funding to the WHO and announced the U.S. withdrawal from the agency after criticising it for its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and closeness to China.
Concerns about the WHO’s caving to China during the pandemic was exposed already back in 2023 by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic of the U.S. House of Representatives, which found that
The World Health Organization caved to political pressure from the Chinese Communist Party and placed CCP interests ahead of global public health.
But it is not just the United States that has found fault with the WHO. According to a European Parliament think tank briefing paper from 2020, “Even before coronavirus, the WHO already had a mixed track record.” The document concluded that
The WHO also failed to hold China to account for its initial cover-up, and even praised its transparency.
As for European leaders, they should take three clear steps to ensure their WHO contributions (their citizens’ hard-earned tax euros) are well spent. First, they should pause extra funding until the WHO recommits itself and its entire budget to disease prevention, vaccines, and pandemic readiness. Second, the European Union must establish an independent oversight body to audit WHO spending and ensure transparency. Third, if the WHO refuses to reform, Europe should redirect its contributions to more effective global health initiatives like Gavi or the Global Fund. These steps would finally push the WHO to prioritise urgent health threats instead of lifestyle policies.
Beyond funding concerns, there is also a need for structural reform within the WHO. The organisation lacks clear mechanisms for accountability, which leads to inefficiencies and policy decisions based more on ideology rather than science. EU member states, particularly those that provide significant financial contributions, should push for strategic changes that emphasize transparency, performance evaluation, and stakeholder accountability. This would ensure its policies serve a genuine global health purpose.
The need for reform is urgent. The world is facing an era of heightened health risks, from emerging infectious diseases to antimicrobial resistance. Resources should be directed toward tackling these threats rather than policing dietary habits and nicotine alternatives. Especially when the WHO’s favoured interventionist approach does nothing to improve health outcomes while exacerbating cost-of-living crises by increasing the cost of food.
Europe must take the lead in demanding change, using its financial influence to push the WHO back toward its original mandate. If the organisation refuses to evolve, it risks becoming irrelevant and actively harmful to global health.
Europe has the power to demand these changes. It must act now, before the next global health crisis proves how unprepared the world still is.
After U.S. Exit It’s Time To Reform the Failing WHO
Photo: © Yann Forget / Wikimedia Commons
The World Health Organisation (WHO) exists to fight deadly diseases, coordinate pandemic responses, and improve global health. But instead of focusing on these core priorities, it has expanded into lifestyle regulations—pushing sugar taxes, alcohol restrictions, and vaping bans. With Italy’s deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini threatening to exit the WHO, and the organisation already in financial trouble after the United States pulled its funding, Europe needs to step up to issue a public demand for accountability and refocusing the WHO on its original mission.
The WHO has a staggering budget of $6.83 billion for its 2024-25 fiscal year, which should be spent on genuine health threats where governments need coordination and where state action can make a real difference, like on communicable diseases. However, instead of investing in research, vaccine development, and emergency preparedness, the WHO has focused on controlling personal lifestyle decisions—increasing taxes on tobacco and alcohol, for example—taking the organisation away from its founding purpose. This has raised widespread doubts about its effectiveness and role in global health governance.
The WHO’s inefficiency was never more visible than during the COVID-19 pandemic, which revealed critical gaps in preparedness, such as delayed responses and an absence of decisive measures at crucial early stages. The fact that two separate institutions—UNAIDS and the Global Fund—were set up reveals the long-standing lack of confidence in the WHO to address the world’s most pressing health concerns.
Donald Trump’s re-election is a huge blow for the WHO. The United States has traditionally been a major contributor to both the WHO’s emergency appeal fund and its broader budget, For the current two-year period, the United States provided about 34% of the funding available for health emergencies. In the past, its contribution has been as high as 50%. However, that financing could be at risk. In his first stint in the White House, Trump moved to cut funding to the WHO and announced the U.S. withdrawal from the agency after criticising it for its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and closeness to China.
Concerns about the WHO’s caving to China during the pandemic was exposed already back in 2023 by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic of the U.S. House of Representatives, which found that
But it is not just the United States that has found fault with the WHO. According to a European Parliament think tank briefing paper from 2020, “Even before coronavirus, the WHO already had a mixed track record.” The document concluded that
As for European leaders, they should take three clear steps to ensure their WHO contributions (their citizens’ hard-earned tax euros) are well spent. First, they should pause extra funding until the WHO recommits itself and its entire budget to disease prevention, vaccines, and pandemic readiness. Second, the European Union must establish an independent oversight body to audit WHO spending and ensure transparency. Third, if the WHO refuses to reform, Europe should redirect its contributions to more effective global health initiatives like Gavi or the Global Fund. These steps would finally push the WHO to prioritise urgent health threats instead of lifestyle policies.
Beyond funding concerns, there is also a need for structural reform within the WHO. The organisation lacks clear mechanisms for accountability, which leads to inefficiencies and policy decisions based more on ideology rather than science. EU member states, particularly those that provide significant financial contributions, should push for strategic changes that emphasize transparency, performance evaluation, and stakeholder accountability. This would ensure its policies serve a genuine global health purpose.
The need for reform is urgent. The world is facing an era of heightened health risks, from emerging infectious diseases to antimicrobial resistance. Resources should be directed toward tackling these threats rather than policing dietary habits and nicotine alternatives. Especially when the WHO’s favoured interventionist approach does nothing to improve health outcomes while exacerbating cost-of-living crises by increasing the cost of food.
Europe must take the lead in demanding change, using its financial influence to push the WHO back toward its original mandate. If the organisation refuses to evolve, it risks becoming irrelevant and actively harmful to global health.
Europe has the power to demand these changes. It must act now, before the next global health crisis proves how unprepared the world still is.
READ NEXT
Trump, Vance Shake Europe Awake From Liberal Dream
Beyond Francis: Will His Controversial Legacy Be Continued?
The Hungarian Way: Supporting Families to Boost Birth Rates