Global & US Headlines
Trump Orders U.S. Withdrawal from 66 International Organizations
On 8 Jan 2026 President Trump signed a memorandum directing federal agencies to end U.S. membership and funding in 66 multilateral bodies effective immediately.
Focusing Facts
- The list names 31 United Nations entities and 35 non-UN organizations, including the UNFCCC, IPCC, UN Women, and the Global Counter-Terrorism Forum.
- The move implements findings of a review mandated by Executive Order 14199 (signed 4 Feb 2025) and instructs departments to complete withdrawals “as soon as legally permissible.”
- AEI estimates the cut affects roughly $130 million in annual U.S. contributions to the non-UN bodies and over $300 million to the targeted UN programs.
Context
Washington has periodically recoiled from multilateralism—Congress rejected the League of Nations in 1919 and the Reagan administration quit UNESCO in 1984—only to re-engage when strategic realities changed. The 2026 mass exit continues a post-Cold-War drift toward transactional foreign policy that began with the 1990s arrears fight at the UN and accelerated under both Obama-era partisan gridlock and Trump’s first term departures from WHO and the Paris Agreement. Long-term, shrinking U.S. presence in rule-making forums invites rival powers, notably China, to fill budget and leadership vacuums just as norms on climate, tech, and security are being written; this could shift agenda-setting power for decades, much as U.S. absence from early maritime treaties in the 1970s left space for the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to develop without American imprint. Whether this moment endures or is reversed by future administrations will shape the architecture of global governance well into the 22nd century.
Perspectives
Right-leaning media outlets
e.g., The Daily Wire, Deseret News — Portray Trump’s mass withdrawal as a long-overdue move to stop subsidising “wasteful” globalist bodies and put American sovereignty and taxpayers first. Echo administration talking points and minimise the strategic or humanitarian downsides, reflecting partisan support for an “America First” agenda.
International or UN-focused outlets
e.g., TRT World, Sahara Reporters — Highlight UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ regret and stress that U.S. financial contributions remain a binding legal obligation under the UN Charter. Seek to protect multilateral institutions’ budgets and legitimacy, framing the U.S. as neglecting global responsibilities to pressure Washington to reverse course.
Left-leaning or progressive media
e.g., The Independent, RocketNews — Depict the withdrawals as a reckless, isolationist assault on climate action and global governance that leaves the world—and the U.S.—less safe. Use alarmist language and link the move to broader critiques of Trump, potentially overstating immediate impacts to mobilise opposition.