Escalating tensions in the information war on health and climate
Friend or foe, no one knows what to expect from Donald Trump. America’s 47th President fired off a wide-reaching salvo of legislative reform on Inauguration Day, sweeping in seismic changes to the status quo. Among the litany of executive orders came the news that the US will withdraw from both the Paris Climate Agreement and the United Nations’ World Health Organisation. Echoes of these decisions will ring for years, and understanding the superpower’s stance on matters of public health, climate change and scientific consensus is a matter of global security.
Founded by the fledgling UN in 1948, the WHO has been accredited with coordinating the end of smallpox, the near-eradication of polio and the rapid global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The symbolic importance of the organisation – as a pillar of international cooperation regarding health, science and law – far outweighs the financial burden it places on its Western backers. If legal challenges against the move are unsuccessful, the decision to quit will take effect a year from the executive order. Meanwhile, the government has demanded the immediate withdrawal of funds, support and resources to the WHO and terminated all engagement with the WHO’s Pandemic Agreement and International Health Regulations.
Internationally, it is uncertain whether nation states or private donors will step up to fill the WHO’s 12% funding gap. Domestically, American institutes, academia and the private sector may attempt to fill gaps left by erratic policy swings, but they might not be equipped to meet the challenge. As long as the Centres for Disease Control fears censorship campaigns, the National Institutes of Health is knee-capped by misdirection, and government websites pertaining to sexual, reproductive and LGBTQ+ healthcare remain “scrubbed” or inexplicably dark, it is difficult to imagine America developing effective and strategic health policy. New frictions can be expected with the incoming Secretary of Health’s (RFK Jr.) continued promotion of medical misinformation – signalling an embrace of public health contrarianism.
It is unsurprising that Trump’s attitude on climate policy also opposes scientists’ concerns, considering fossil fuel industries donated US$75 million to his presidential campaign. The President’s issue of an executive order to restart the US’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, endorsed by all 197 UN countries in 2015 with aims to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius, threatens to undermine global consensus and cooperation. As part of the agreement, Japan, China and most EU nations set carbon neutrality goals and net zero targets, measured by Nationally Determined Contributions.The US’ withdrawal now brings the entire project’s ambitions into question.
America’s role in limiting emissions is vital to reach the proposed targets, with the Global Electricity Review 2024 finding that the increase in global gas generation in the US was more than 2.5 times the global average. The US also contributed to the Loss and Damage Fund established during COP27 in Glasgow. Since then, alongside other developed nations, US$300 billion has been pledged annually to assist poorer, developing countries least responsible and most vulnerable to climate change. The US’ withdrawal fails to address these climate reparations.
This stance could influence other nations, with Trump’s election victory emboldening states like Saudi Arabia to defend their use of fossil fuels at COP29. However, when Trump first sought to withdraw in 2017, EU countries responded by making more ambitious commitments, China was happy to adopt sole leadership, and 30 US states pledged to uphold the Paris Agreement. Furthermore, the EU offset most of the US’ global gas generation in 2024 and the continued efforts of developed nation states to tackle climate change demonstrate international commitment to the issue, despite Trump’s efforts to deny it.
Trump’s assault on scientific consensus reflects his vision of “reclaiming” America’s global standing from experts he portrays as a “corrupt global elite.” While his WHO withdrawal creates a concerning leadership vacuum in global health, and the Paris Agreement exit poses serious challenges, hope remains. Private enterprise and other nations’ continued commitment to evidence-based climate action suggest the international community can advance without US federal support, though Trump’s policies remain an urgent threat to scientific collaboration and progress.
Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash