IRIA News

6 minute read

U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order for the United States to withdraw from 66 international organizations, including UN agencies and global bodies focused on climate, development, and security.

Trump signed a presidential memorandum and executive order on January 8, 2025, directing all U.S. government departments and agencies to end participation in and funding for 31 United Nations entities and 35 non-U.N. international organizations “as soon as possible,” according to a White House release.

The decision follows a comprehensive administration-led review of international organizations and treaties supported or funded by the United States.

The White House said the organizations targeted operate “contrary to U.S. national interests, security, economic prosperity, or sovereignty,” and argued that continued U.S. involvement no longer delivers sufficient value for American taxpayers.

UN Agencies and Climate Bodies are Affected.

Among the 31 U.N.-affiliated entities the United States will exit are several high-profile organizations involved in climate policy, social development, and human rights.

They include the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), described by many as the bedrock international climate treaty and the parent agreement to the 2015 Paris climate accord.

The order also covers UN Women, the UN’s main body promoting gender equality and women’s empowerment, as well as the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), which works on population issues, reproductive health, and demographic research.

Other UN-linked bodies listed for withdrawal include the Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children in Armed Conflict, the Office of the Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the UN Human Settlements Program (UN-Habitat), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent.

The administration said these organizations span policy areas such as climate change, conservation, labor, migration, trade, and social policy, fields that senior officials argue have increasingly moved in directions misaligned with U.S. priorities.

Non-UN Organizations

The withdrawal order also applies to 35 non-UN international organizations, including several influential scientific, energy, and security-focused bodies.

Among them is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s leading authority on climate science and a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. The United States will also leave the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and the International Solar Alliance (ISA), both of which promote global cooperation on renewable energy.

Other organizations affected include the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, the Global Counterterrorism Forum, the Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia (ReCAAP), the Colombo Plan Council, and the Science and Technology Center in Ukraine (STCU), which was created to support the non-proliferation of nuclear and biological weapons in several former Soviet states.

The administration said these institutions were found to be “redundant in their scope, mismanaged, unnecessary, wasteful, poorly run, or captured by the interests of actors advancing their own agendas.”

Administration Justification

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement that many of the organizations were pursuing agendas that conflict with U.S. interests.

“Some of these institutions are working on agendas contrary to the interests of the United States,” Rubio said, adding that American resources should not be used to support bodies that undermine U.S. sovereignty or economic strength.

The White House argued that many of the targeted organizations promote what it described as “globalist” or “ideological” programs, including what officials labeled “radical climate policies,” diversity and gender initiatives, and forms of global governance that constrain national decision-making.

“American taxpayers have spent billions on these organizations with little return,” the administration said, claiming that many of the bodies frequently criticize U.S. policies while failing to deliver tangible results.

Continuation of Earlier Withdrawals

The latest move builds on a series of earlier decisions by Trump since returning to office. He has already initiated the withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Agreement, and formally notified the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development that its Global Tax Deal has no force or effect in the United States.

Trump also signed an executive order withdrawing the United States from the UN Human Rights Council and prohibiting future funding for the UN Relief and Works Agency for the Near East (UNRWA).

In addition, the administration sharply reduced foreign assistance through the U.S. Agency for International Development last year, forcing several UN agencies to scale back operations, particularly in developing countries and in global public health programs.

The White House said the new withdrawal order is part of a broader effort to redirect resources toward domestic priorities, including infrastructure, military readiness, and border security.

Focus on Sovereignty and Spending.

In announcing the decision, the administration framed the withdrawals as a step toward “restoring American sovereignty” and ending what it described as wasteful international spending.

“President Trump is clear: It is no longer acceptable to be sending these institutions the blood, sweat, and treasure of the American people, with little to nothing to show for it,” the White House said. “The days of billions of dollars in taxpayer money flowing to foreign interests at the expense of our people are over.”

The administration said cooperation with international partners would continue where it serves U.S. interests, but emphasized that Washington would disengage from institutions it views as ineffective or hostile.

Climate Policy and Fossil Fuels

Trump’s decision to withdraw from major climate institutions comes as he intensifies support for fossil fuels at home. He has repeatedly dismissed climate change as a “hoax” and renewable energy as a “scam,” while promoting expanded oil and gas production.

Critics argue that exiting global climate and development bodies could weaken international cooperation and reduce U.S. influence in shaping global standards. Supporters of the move, however, say it restores policy autonomy and ensures taxpayer money is spent in line with national priorities.