U.N. Condemns U.S. Withdrawal from Multiple Agencies, Cites Legal Obligations

The United Nations has pushed back against the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw support from dozens of international organizations, stating that the United States has a “legal obligation” to continue funding U.N. agencies.

Secretary-General Antonio Guterres expressed regret over President Donald Trump’s executive order that cuts U.S. support for 31 U.N.-related agencies, including the U.N. Population Fund and the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), as well as 35 other global organizations not affiliated with the U.N.

“Assessed contributions to the United Nations regular budget and peacekeeping budget, as approved by the General Assembly, are a legal obligation under the U.N. Charter for all Member States, including the United States,” said Stephane Dujarric, spokesperson for Guterres, in a firmly worded statement.

The withdrawal announcement has caught U.N. officials by surprise, with many diplomats reporting they learned about the decision through news reports and White House social media rather than through formal diplomatic channels. As of Thursday, the U.N. had not received any official communication from the Trump administration detailing the specific cuts.

Despite the funding uncertainty, Dujarric emphasized that affected U.N. entities would continue their operations, stating, “The United Nations has a responsibility to deliver for those who depend on us.”

The relationship between the U.N. and the United States has grown increasingly strained since Trump returned to office. His administration has focused on eliminating billions in international aid and funding to multilateral organizations. Prior to Wednesday’s announcement, U.N. officials had managed to secure some commitments from the administration, including a $2 billion agreement for humanitarian assistance announced last month.

However, America’s retreat from international organizations has already influenced other Western powers, including France and the United Kingdom, to reevaluate their humanitarian funding commitments, with many shifting resources toward military spending.

The executive order signed by Trump follows a year-long review of U.S. participation in and funding for international organizations. The administration has particularly targeted agencies and commissions focused on climate, labor, migration, and other issues it has categorized as promoting “woke” initiatives.

This is not the first time the Trump administration has withdrawn from international bodies. It previously suspended support for the World Health Organization, the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the U.N. Human Rights Council, and UNESCO. The administration has increasingly taken what observers call an “à la carte approach” to paying U.N. dues, selectively supporting operations it believes align with Trump’s agenda while cutting those deemed contrary to U.S. interests.

The U.N. Population Fund, which provides sexual and reproductive health services globally, has long been opposed by Republican administrations. Trump previously cut its funding during his first term in office.

The withdrawal from the UNFCCC, the treaty underpinning the landmark Paris climate agreement, has drawn particular concern from environmental experts. Simon Stiell, UNFCCC executive secretary, warned that the decision would harm “the U.S. economy, jobs and living standards, as wildfires, floods, mega-storms and droughts get rapidly worse.”

Stiell added, “The doors remain open for the U.S. to reenter in the future, as it has in the past with the Paris Agreement.”

Under U.N. rules, the United States, as the world’s largest economy, is obligated to contribute 22% of the organization’s regular budget, which finances day-to-day operations, and 25% of the peacekeeping budget. U.N. officials noted that the U.S. did not pay its annual contributions to the regular budget last year, putting it at risk of losing its vote in the General Assembly.

Dujarric emphasized the binding nature of these financial commitments, stating, “The charter is not à la carte. We’re not going to renegotiate the charter.”

The latest funding cuts come at a challenging time for the United Nations, which faces increasing pressure to address global crises with potentially diminished resources as its largest contributor scales back support.