Trump Pulls US Out of 66 International Organizations, Including UN Climate and Population Agencies

The administration of US President Donald Trump has announced a broad withdrawal from dozens of international organizations, deepening Washington’s retreat from multilateral cooperation. The decision affects 66 international bodies, including United Nations agencies, commissions and advisory groups, according to a statement released by the White House after Trump signed an executive order on Wednesday.

The move follows an internal review ordered by the president of US participation in and funding for all international organizations, including those linked to the UN system. A partial list seen by The Associated Press shows that most of the affected bodies are UN-related and focus on areas such as climate policy, labour standards and social issues that the Trump administration has criticised as promoting diversity or what it labels “woke” agendas.

In an official statement, the US State Department said the institutions targeted were deemed “redundant, mismanaged, unnecessary, wasteful or poorly run”, and accused some of being captured by interests that undermine US sovereignty, freedoms and economic well-being. The administration argues that continued participation in such bodies does not serve American national interests.

The decision comes amid a period of heightened tension in US foreign policy, as the Trump administration has taken or threatened unilateral actions that have unsettled allies and rivals alike. These include US operations related to Venezuela’s leader Nicolás Maduro and repeated signals that Washington intends to assert control over Greenland.

The withdrawals build on earlier steps taken by Trump’s team to suspend support for major international bodies, including the World Health Organization, the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), the UN Human Rights Council and UNESCO. At the same time, the US has shifted to a selective approach to paying UN dues, funding only those activities that align with the administration’s priorities.

Daniel Forti, head of UN affairs at the International Crisis Group, described the policy as a clear statement of how Washington now views multilateralism. According to him, the US position can be summed up as cooperation strictly on American terms, marking a significant departure from the approach of previous Republican and Democratic administrations.

The pullback has already had tangible effects on the United Nations, which has been forced to consider staff reductions and programme cuts while undergoing internal reforms. Independent non-governmental organizations working alongside the UN have also reported widespread project closures, following the Trump administration’s earlier decision to sharply reduce foreign aid through the US Agency for International Development.

Despite the scale of the withdrawal, US officials insist the country has not turned its back entirely on the UN system. Trump and senior administration figures say Washington will continue to invest in international bodies where it sees strategic value, particularly standard-setting organizations where the US competes with China. These include the International Telecommunications Union, the International Maritime Organization and the International Labor Organization.

Among the most consequential decisions is the US withdrawal from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), a 1992 treaty involving 198 countries that underpins global climate negotiations and the Paris Agreement. Trump, a long-time climate sceptic, pulled the US out of the Paris accord shortly after returning to office, and the exit from the UNFCCC further distances Washington from international climate action.

Former White House national climate adviser Gina McCarthy sharply criticised the move, calling it damaging to US credibility and influence. She warned that abandoning the UNFCCC would weaken America’s role in shaping global climate policy and investment decisions worth trillions of dollars.

Climate scientists and experts have also expressed concern. Researchers point out that climate change is already fuelling more frequent and destructive extreme weather events worldwide. Stanford University climate scientist Rob Jackson said the US decision could slow global progress on cutting greenhouse gas emissions, as other countries may use Washington’s withdrawal as a justification to delay their own commitments.

The UN Population Fund, which provides reproductive and sexual health services globally, is also among the organizations affected. It has long faced opposition from Republicans. Trump cut its funding during his first term, citing allegations of involvement in coercive abortion practices in China. Those claims were later dismissed by a State Department review under President Joe Biden, who restored funding in 2021.

Other organizations the US plans to exit include the Carbon Free Energy Compact, the United Nations University, the International Cotton Advisory Committee, the International Tropical Timber Organization, the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, the Pan-American Institute of Geography and History, the International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies, and the International Lead and Zinc Study Group.

The State Department said reviews of US engagement with international organizations are continuing, signalling that further withdrawals may follow.