America Turns Inward Under Trump: Unprecedented Retreat From Global Aid and Multilateral Institutions Raises Alarms Worldwide

Ever since he took office for a second term, Donald Trump has pursued a course that many analysts say is without precedent in modern American history — a systematic withdrawal from international organisations, multilateral agreements, and humanitarian frameworks that the United States itself once helped build and sustain.

Time and again, Trump has argued that the US bears a disproportionate financial burden in global institutions that, in his view, pursue a “globalist agenda” misaligned with American priorities.

He has repeatedly accused international bodies of favouring China, despite Washington contributing far more in terms of funding and leadership.

This argument was most starkly articulated in January 2025, when the United States formally withdrew from the World Health Organisation.

At the time, the Trump administration accused the WHO of failing to enact “urgently needed reforms” and of being unable to demonstrate independence from the political influence of certain member states.

The White House also highlighted what it described as an unfair funding structure.

“The WHO continues to demand unfairly onerous payments from the United States,” the administration said, noting that while China has more than three times the population of the US, it contributes nearly 90% less to the organisation.

For Trump, this imbalance symbolised everything he claims is wrong with global institutions.

In his latest round of withdrawals, Trump again cited opposition to what he called a “globalist agenda,” arguing that US taxpayer money should be redirected to domestic priorities.

In an official statement, he said the exits would end American funding for entities that, according to him, advance international ideologies over US interests or function inefficiently.

Among the most consequential decisions is the planned withdrawal from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the foundational agreement underpinning global climate cooperation and the 2015 Paris Agreement.

Environmental experts say this would make the US the first country ever to walk away from the UNFCCC.

Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defence Council, warned that such a move goes beyond symbolism.

“Every other nation is a member because they recognise that climate negotiations are not just about morality, but about shaping future economic policy and opportunity,” he said, adding that abandoning the table weakens America’s long-term influence.

The US had already signalled this retreat last year by skipping the UN’s annual global climate summit for the first time in nearly three decades — a move widely interpreted as a clear step back from international climate leadership.

The pullback extends well beyond climate.

Washington is also set to exit UN Women, which works to advance gender equality and women’s empowerment, and the UN Population Fund, which supports family planning, maternal health, and child welfare in over 150 countries.

US funding for UNFPA had already been slashed last year, effectively crippling several programmes in vulnerable regions.

Critically, withdrawing from these bodies also means cutting aid. Trump has already eliminated most voluntary US contributions to UN agencies, drastically reducing both America’s financial support and its humanitarian footprint.

Analysts note that foreign aid and assistance have traditionally been viewed as moral and strategic tools — gestures by a financially strong nation to support stability, health, education, and human dignity across the world.

Under Trump, that philosophy appears to have been decisively set aside.

Many observers argue that no other US president in recent history has disengaged so comprehensively from humanitarian and multilateral commitments.

While previous administrations debated reform, burden-sharing, or efficiency, outright withdrawal — especially from aid-linked institutions — was rare.

Yet, Trump’s retreat from aid does not signal a retreat from power.

His administration continues to rely heavily on tariffs as a coercive economic tool and on military force as a lever of influence.

In 2025 alone, US forces carried out strikes or military operations in countries including Syria, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, and Iran.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated this posture during a press briefing, saying the president prefers diplomacy but retains the right to use military force when deemed necessary.

Referring to Venezuela, she said Trump pursued talks with Nicolás Maduro, though the administration considers him an illegitimate and unreliable actor.

Despite the withdrawals, US officials quoted by France 24 suggested that a complete exit from the United Nations is unlikely.

They noted that Trump still wants a seat at forums that set global standards — particularly to counter China’s influence.

Continued engagement with bodies such as the International Telecommunication Union, the International Maritime Organisation, and the International Labour Organisation is seen as strategically necessary.

Even so, the broader picture is unmistakable. The United States, long seen as a pillar of global aid and humanitarian leadership, is redefining its role under Trump.

For many around the world, the message is unsettling: a superpower with vast resources appears increasingly willing to walk away from helping the vulnerable — a shift that may reshape global cooperation for years to come.

#DonaldTrump #USForeignPolicy #GlobalAid #UnitedNations #WHO #ClimateChange #UNFCCC #HumanitarianCrisis #AmericaFirst #GlobalPolitics