U.S. withdraws from dozens of U.N. and global bodies, raising questions over future cooperation

By Chemtai Kirui

 

Nairobi, Jan. 9 — The United Nations (UN) is facing renewed uncertainty over funding and global cooperation after the United States moved to withdraw from dozens of U.N.–affiliated and international organizations, including bodies central to climate action, development and human rights.

 

The move, issued through a presidential memorandum on Jan. 7, directs U.S. executive departments to begin withdrawing from 31 U.N.-linked entities and 35 other international organizations that the Trump administration says no longer align with U.S. national interests. 

 

The administration cited concerns over redundancy, mismanagement and conflicts with American sovereignty.

 

Among the most prominent entities affected are the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which underpins global climate negotiations; UN Women; and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). 

 

The withdrawals also extend to organizations involved in labor standards, renewable energy cooperation, environmental conservation, migration and development, spanning both U.N. and non-U.N. frameworks.

 

The move is being closely watched in the region because Nairobi hosts Africa’s only United Nations headquarters, the United Nations Office at Nairobi (UNON), and serves as a hub for U.N. agencies working on climate change, humanitarian response, public health, development and gender equality across the continent.

 

U.N. agencies support government and community programs on drought response, refugee assistance, climate resilience, disease prevention, education and gender equality, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.

 

These agencies rely on a combination of assessed contributions — mandatory payments required under the U.N. Charter, and voluntary funding from donor countries to run programs, deploy staff and respond to humanitarian and development needs.

 

While no single country finances the U.N. system, the United States has historically been among its largest contributors.

 

Analysts say reduced U.S. participation or funding could create budget shortfalls, potentially affecting the scale, timing or sustainability of some U.N. programs, especially in regions facing humanitarian or climate-related pressures.

 

The announcement took U.N. officials by surprise, with the Secretariat confirming it had not received prior formal communication from Washington. 

 

U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres expressed regret over the decision but said that U.N. entities would continue implementing their mandates.

 

“The U.N. has a responsibility to deliver for all those who rely on us,” U.N. spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric said. “Our work on climate, humanitarian support, gender equality and human rights will continue with determination.”

 

Guterres also said that assessed contributions to the U.N.’s regular and peacekeeping budgets remain a legal obligation under the U.N. Charter, even for countries withdrawing from specific agencies. 

 

Dujarric confirmed that the U.S. did not pay its assessed contributions in 2025, a situation that, if prolonged, could result in the loss of its General Assembly vote under Article 19 of the Charter. Security Council membership and voting rights are not affected.

 

The Trump administration has defended the move as part of a broader effort to prioritize domestic interests and reduce involvement in international arrangements it views as ineffective or politically driven.

 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the decision reflects a policy shift aimed at protecting U.S. sovereignty and ensuring international engagements deliver clear value to American taxpayers.

 

Critics argue that withdrawing from multilateral institutions could reduce U.S. influence in shaping global decision-making, particularly on climate change, humanitarian assistance and gender equality, where coordinated international action plays a central role.

 

The withdrawal from UNFCCC has drawn particular attention, given the treaty’s role as the foundation for global climate talks and climate finance mechanisms used by developing countries.

 

Analysts say that while U.S. federal engagement may diminish, individual U.S. states, cities and private sector actors are expected to continue pursuing climate initiatives independently.

 

“The withdrawal isolates the U.S. from formal multilateral climate negotiations but does not halt global climate action,” Dujarric said, adding that U.N. work on climate, development and human rights would continue.

 

Implementation of the withdrawals may take months and could involve legal, administrative and diplomatic negotiations. In the meantime, the U.N. continues operating under existing funding arrangements, with officials saying field operations, from humanitarian assistance to development programs — will proceed.

 

While immediate impacts on day-to-day U.N. operations are expected to be limited, analysts warn the move could carry longer-term implications for international cooperation.