Hundreds of World Health Organization officials will gather in Geneva starting Monday, their minds preoccupied with a single pressing question: How will they manage global health crises, from smallpox to cholera, without the financial backing of their primary sponsor, the United States?
This is a significant shift for the annual week-long assembly, which typically serves as a stage for the U.N. agency’s role in handling disease outbreaks, endorsing vaccines, and bolstering health systems worldwide. Today, the organization finds itself at a crossroads, contemplating a future of reduced scope and resources.
According to reliable sources, Daniel Thornton, the WHO’s director of coordinated resource mobilization, stated that the organization is aiming to “focus on the high-value stuff”. However, just what constitutes this “high-value stuff” remains an open question. WHO officials have indicated that providing guidelines for countries regarding new vaccines and treatments for conditions ranging from obesity to HIV will continue to be a priority.
Despite this, the United States, which had contributed approximately 18% of the WHO’s funding, was noticeably absent from the assembly. To quote a Western diplomat who wished to remain anonymous, “We’ve got to make do with what we have.”
Turning now to the broader implications, the World Health Organization is preparing for a future with a $600 million gap in its budget for this year alone, and an anticipated 21% cut over the next two-year period. As the U.S. withdraws, China is slated to become the largest provider of state fees, one of the WHO’s main revenue sources, along with donations.
Chen Xu, China’s ambassador to Geneva, had this to say on the matter: “We have to adapt ourselves to multilateral organizations without the Americans. Life goes on.” As such, the World Health Organization is confronting a new era in global health governance, an era that raises important questions about the organization’s future direction and its ability to meet the world’s health needs.
As the WHO reconfigures, some are advocating for a broader overhaul. Anil Soni, chief executive of the WHO Foundation, posed the question, “Does WHO need all its committees? Does it need to be publishing thousands of publications each year?” While these questions remain unanswered, the WHO is actively seeking to secure key projects during the immediate financial crisis.
The World Health Organization finds itself at a monumental turning point, an organization reshaping itself in the face of a significant financial setback. The days ahead will surely test the resilience of the global health institution.
