On July 18, 2025, the United States formally rejected a World Health Organization (WHO) accord designed to enhance global readiness for future pandemics, citing concerns over its scope and development process. The legally binding agreement, adopted by WHO members in Geneva in May 2025 after three years of negotiations, aimed to ensure equitable access to vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics during pandemics.

Details of the Accord

The WHO pact sought to address the uneven global response to COVID-19 by requiring participating manufacturers to reserve 20% of their pandemic-related medical supplies—such as vaccines, medicines, and tests—for distribution by the WHO, particularly to lower-income nations. The agreement was intended to prevent disparities in access to critical health resources during global health crises.

U.S. Rationale for Rejection

In a joint statement from the Department of State and the Department of Health and Human Services, signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the U.S. criticized the accord’s development and provisions. The statement highlighted a lack of adequate public input during negotiations and raised concerns about vague terminology that could prioritize political goals, such as “solidarity,” over swift, effective action.

The U.S. also expressed unease with the accord’s expansion of WHO’s authority in declaring and managing public health emergencies, as well as its role in facilitating equitable access to medical resources. The statement argued that these provisions could lead to inefficiencies in global health responses.

Context of U.S. Withdrawal

The decision follows the U.S. initiation of its withdrawal from the WHO, the organization’s largest financial contributor, under President Donald Trump’s administration starting in January 2025. The 12-month withdrawal process means the U.S. will not be bound by the accord, a move that has sparked debate about its implications for global health cooperation.

Implications

The U.S. rejection of the accord could weaken global efforts to ensure equitable access to medical resources during future pandemics, particularly for developing nations reliant on WHO coordination. Critics argue that the decision may undermine international solidarity, while supporters of the U.S. stance emphasize the need for transparent, efficient frameworks that prioritize rapid response over bureaucratic expansion.

As the global health community navigates these challenges, the absence of U.S. participation may reshape the WHO’s approach to future pandemics, prompting calls for alternative strategies to address inequities in global healthcare access.