U.S. continues to fall flat on global responsibilities

Editor's note: Anthony Moretti, a special commentator for CGTN, is an associate professor at the Department of Communication and Organizational Leadership at Robert Morris University in the U.S. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily those of either CGTN or Robert Morris University.

The laundry list of examples in which the United States has failed on the international stage grows seemingly by the day. Whether it is threatening allies and foes, advancing immigration policies wholly inconsistent with American values, handcuffing free trade through tariffs, or something else, the image of the U.S. around the world continues to suffer because of reckless decisions.

One other item that should not be ignored: The choice to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO). On January 22, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would exit the WHO in one year's time. That date has arrived, meaning the White House will soon insist that the country has no responsibilities to the international body so essential to global health.

We will return to the egregious decision to abandon the WHO below, but the reality is that the U.S. still has obligations to the organization. The country has not paid its dues for 2024 or 2025, meaning it is in arrears by roughly $260 million.  

For its part, the WHO has adapted to a two-pronged approach to America's dereliction of commitment. On the one hand, it is examining all possible mechanisms to get the money it is owed. On the other hand, it remains optimistic that Trump will change his mind, however unlikely that seems. One leading health official recently said, "The flag of the United States continues to fly outside the WHO building (in Geneva), and that's not a mistake. It's a very intentional signal that they welcome U.S. to re-engage."

To expect the U.S. president to "re-engage" seems like a foolish bet. And that means his intransigence expands the damage to America's credibility around the world. To fully summarize the work the WHO does in one sentence is impossible, but suffice to say that it focuses on keeping the world's 7-plus billion people as healthy as possible. And, yes, the U.S., because of its wealth, pays the highest level of funds to promote that noble goal. Frankly, it should be that way: The U.S. can afford it, and the global population benefits from it.

Allies will want to know whether the U.S. will expand the lengthy list of organizations which it deems no longer worthy of its time and treasure. A couple of weeks ago, the White House pulled the country out of 66 different international accords, which range from the environment to education, history to trade. The White House stated such moves were necessary because they "will end American taxpayer funding and involvement in entities that advance globalist agendas over U.S. priorities." Similar words were used to validate ditching the WHO.

Such nonsense. Many of these agencies – some decades old – focus on improving the lives of the poor and the most vulnerable. Let us not forget the words at the base of the Statue of Liberty, the most prominent symbol of America's long history of aiding people all over the world: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." Let's take those words and adjust them just a bit: Let us support reputable international agencies that protect the tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free of disease and environmental degradation.

It is clear that Trump cares for none of this. But why? How does such an agenda align with a country he wants to make "great again?" The short answer: It does not. It never will. Instead, he looks small in stature and in leadership as his administration convulses forward much like a pinball in a pinball machine: Good luck guessing where it might go next.

"America First" need not mean that all other nations or global organizations are troublesome nuisances that need to be kicked to the curb. America built its global reputation in part on its commitment to offer financial and other support to strengthening the bonds between, and improving the lives of, people. Yet American foreign policy at the moment can be summarized as – if an ally continues to do Washington's bidding, it will remain an ally; if it does not, then it instantly becomes a foe that must suffer a host of consequences. Such a strategy affirms what leaders from China and other parts of the world have consistently said: The law of the jungle cannot define international relations in the 21st century.

Let us also not forget that Trump administration is acting as if it would like to create its own version of the United Nations as it attempts to remake the world. Its ballyhooed "Board of Peace," which it fully revealed a few days ago, is built on its insistence that the UN has failed time and again in maintaining global peace.

The U.S. has a long history of failing to maintain global stability, but this president has hinted at or already taken actions no other previous White House occupant has. Using his typical bombast and bluster to claim that he will be a champion of peace is yet another reason to conclude that America's global standing continues to be eroded.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X, formerly Twitter, to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)