8 ms·
U.S. is terminating its relationship with World Health Organization, Trump says
- briantakita 6y agoHere's President Donald Trump's announcement. Hong Kong's special trade status is also revoked. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1266455834457968640 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/12664558344579686...
- Simulacra 6y agoThank you for posting this, it was nice to see Honk Kong's status under review; does congress need to approve? We have tools we can use to reign in China's harmful behavior - perhaps next in the dock for consideration should be China's Most Favored Nation status....
- LinuxBender 6y agoI would love to see some of the money routed to NIH.gov instead. They have lost a great deal of funding over the years and we have a greater need for scientific research of diseases now more than ever.
- NicoJuicy 6y agoDividing global response isn't bad enough? He already cut NIH and is now doing the same with WHO. These both are bad decisions from an incompetent leader. This is a sad situation... Again.
- effingwewt 6y agoAgreed, if we had a fallback solution it wouldn't be so bad, but as is, I just feel like the whole world is the worse for it. Hopefully something good will come of it, but I can't see what from here. Funding cuts to CDC, now this. I just wonder whether the WHO could have been repaired as-is?
- djaque 6y ago> I just wonder whether the WHO could have been repaired as-is But that's the thing. The WHO isn't perfect and I'm uncomfortable with how much power China has inside of the UN in general, but I don't understand why people are saying it's broken. I've been searching for those arguments and the only sources I can find are conspiracy theorists and far-right news organizations. Could you please explain the reasons you think the WHO isn't functioning?
- djaque 6y agoPresident Trump has spent the past four years trying to cut funding to the NIH and congress has repeatedly overridden him. I would be shocked if that money went anywhere but the places he thinks will fire up his base of voters.
- blackrock 6y agoYou gotta wonder. What is he hiding? This likely means that the United States will not cooperate with the W.H.O. to investigate the true origins of the virus, wherever it originated in the world.
- barnesto 6y ago"wherever it originated in the world?" are you a CCP shill? it originated in China. Wuhan Province. It's not a mystery. And talk about not cooperating, that would be the CCP. Who not only destroyed all evidence on the ground but was and is unwilling to share any data with the world. Oh yeah, they also lied about the virus and how bad it was. They also got the WHO to say it wasn't a big deal and there was no person to person transmission. All that means is your asking the wrong question to stir things up.
- pazimzadeh 6y agoIt was in Europe as early as December 27: https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-timeline-is-upended-as-france-discovers-december-case-11588700408 https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-timeline-is-upended... It doesn't even matter where the virus comes from. Why was South Korea able to handle it better than the US?
- NicoJuicy 6y agoThis one is easy, all neighbors of China have had multiple dangers of epidemics before. This is just the first one that spread globally.
- justwalt 6y agoThat article says the disease arrived in Europe in December, but the earliest case occurred in China in November.
- pkaye 6y agoOne reason is South Korea had to deal with SARS previously and were better prepared.
- pazimzadeh 6y agoThis is not going to reduce China's influence on the WHO. Who is going to be the trusted source now? The NIH? Every year Trump proposes budget cuts to the NIH, and Congress ignores him and increases the budget. I bet this money will end up in private companies' pocket.
- koheripbal 6y agoThe goal seems to be to reduce the WHO's influence, not China's. The US funds about $118 million per year to the who (roughly double what China pays). https://www.who.int/about/finances-accountability/funding/assessed-contributions/en/ https://www.who.int/about/finances-accountability/funding/as...
- andor 6y agoNo, the goal is simply to please Trump's immature ego. In his view, it doesn't matter if someone is right or wrong. What matters for him is whether someone is pictured as a winner or a loser. He's trying to take the conversation from a rational to an emotional level, and way too many people are falling for this trap. The coronavirus outbreak in the US, one of the most serious in the world, is threatening his "winner" status. By blaming the WHO, he is trying to shed himself of responsibility, claiming that they didn't do their job right (we know he was briefed multiple times and ignored the warnings). Cutting funding is simply the next step for him to emphasize who is the loser, which in turn makes him the winner of the conflict.
- koheripbal 6y agoTrump's stupidity aside, I think it's hard to argue that the WHO didn't make serious errors and delayed various recommendations and warnings at the suggestion of China. I think the questions we should ask is... "What are we paying 118 million per year for if they're going to lie to us during the biggest outbreak in modern history?".
- Simulacra 6y agoI hate to see you getting down-voted because I do agree with point one. It won't diminish Chinese influence at all. In fact, it might increase their influence. China has always worked to replace America, why not at the UN?
- MintelIE 6y agoWHO's lost to China's Communist Imperialsm. Sometimes the best move is to burn a bridge and move on.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoSome bridges are worth burning, but in this case (and overall with this administration) all we’re doing is burning the bridges we built. These were not the bridges worth burning.
- Simulacra 6y agoI don't agree with this. Freezing of funding, investigating, etc. is fine, we should. But this is like the withdrawing of ambassadors. Not quite breaking off diplomatic relations but we really should want more cooperation with US and UN officials, not less.
- threatofrain 6y agoIf the US pays a magnitude of money more than China to the WHO, how are we to believe that the WHO is China's puppet, and not an extension of western power? How is China so clever with its maneuverings that its relatively puny contributions go so far?
- mrtweetyhack 6y agoChina puts the money directly into pockets whereas US puts money into WHO. Big difference.
- meowfly 6y agoThe theory goes (which I'm not espousing just relaying) that you could simply bribe top WHO officials and avoid having to provide magnitudes of money. The WHO has been in scandal before regarding [exorbitant spending on travel.] (https://apnews.com/3d8569ea7bd140e4ba02bc1712cd12ab https://apnews.com/3d8569ea7bd140e4ba02bc1712cd12ab)
- Simulacra 6y agoI don't know if it's bribery at work here. Rather, it's anger at American behavior over the last decades which is pushing it closer to China. America is the WHO's primary superpower sponsor, and protector. In the courtship of a new sponsor, China, it could be just that: stoking anger and offering a choice.
- meowfly 6y agoI don't know either. I think all of this is obviously couched in the fact that the poor initial US response to Coronavirus has made it politically expedient to [make this a story about China] (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-memo-advises-candidates-to-attack-china-over-coronavirus https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-memo-advises-candidates...) That doesn't mean the WHO or China have clean hands, just that in an election year for the US my bias would lean towards this being about politics.
- DeonPenny 6y ago
- mrtweetyhack 6y agoAbout time. WHO didn't do their job. I'll do the job at half the price and do it better.
- exabrial 6y agoWho's performance has been abysmal, and they've proven to be the lap dog of the CCP. I totally agreed with the funding hiatus, this is a surprise move to me. There's a lot we don't know.
- jaybrendansmith 6y agoAgree. You apparently don't know the difference between a blame-shifting President, far-right propaganda, and the truth. No institution is perfect, but the WHO was OUR institution, created largely by the US, to control global pandemics. Since we've apparently decided to ignore their advice as well as the advice of our own scientists and the NIH, we are conveniently blaming the WHO.
- foogazi 6y agoHow does this make the US safer?
- DeonPenny 6y agoIt gives the US the ability to create a non-corrupt institution. Right now the WHO is not a reliable global partner. If the US can find other people that feel this way you get a more efficient institution that possibly is more efficient. Whats not safe is continuing to work with someone obvious playing fast and lose with the world.
- djaque 6y ago> WHO is not a reliable global partner That's based off of what evidence? When I search for "WHO corruption" I only find conspiracy theory youTube videos and far-right leaning publications that have a leg in that race. Besides, as was said earlier, this is the equivalent of pulling diplomats out of a country. If corruption is the issue (and I'm not convinced it is) then you'd cut funding. This is a political stunt which is trying to draw attention away from an administrations failed response to a pandemic.
- josephh 6y agoI'm sorry, wasn't the interview with Dr. Bruce Aylward enough to convince you that there's something seriously wrong with the organization's leadership?
- supercanuck 6y agoNo, I see a physician-epidemiologist by training from Newfoundland Canada struggling to manage a global pandemic with two global superpowers in a political arm wrestling match on the global stage when he knows he needs both to cooperate.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- 6y ago
- bill_from_tampa 6y agoSomehow withdrawing funding from the current only worldwide public health organization at the beginning of a pandemic seems ?? shortsighted. Is trump admitting that he is incapable of negotiating his desired changes in WHO functionality, that his ability to communicate and work with international players is so deficient that his only option is to take his baseball bat and baseball and go home? Or is this all a political move to attempt to shift the 'blame' for his/Trump's failings to some other boogeyman? My bet is on this option -- he failed to recognize the magnitude of the epidemic, he failed to take timely and early actions to mitigate the impact on the US economy and lives, he repeatedly minimized the size of the tsunami of death that was approaching our shores, he failed to motivate his FDA/CDC to get working PCR viral tests immediately and produce them in the amounts needed, he failed to coordinate obtaining necessary PPE supplies for the 50 states leading to a dysfunctional free-for-all where states were bidding against each other and FEMA confiscated all shipments they could find, he refused to take any responsibility for all of the above failures, he has recommended use of experimental medical treatments out of clinical trials (hydroxychloroquine), he has actively interfered with the public health necessity of transitioning the US to a "mask wearing culture" by making it a macho / political question instead of a life saving public health intervention, he has demanded that States not follow the 'reopening' metrics advanced by his own covid-19 group.... need I continue?
- free_rms 6y agoIt's 100% blame-shifting. We all saw this happening in China for 2-3 months before it got here, then in Italy a month before it got here. It was all over the news. And we did nothing, as you note. So now the line is that the WHO abetted some sort of cover-up? Does everyone have the memory of a goldfish?
- djaque 6y agoI've been seeing a lot of posts that feel like they're being made in good faith get downvoted because they don't support far-right leaning politics. I'm concerned about this trend on HN.
- alabaster_punt 6y agoThere's a not insignificant far-right presence on this website and many are quite adept at toeing that line between "just asking questions" and "outright stating their position" by filling their responses with obscurantist nonsense. It is indeed concerning.
- djaque 6y agoTalk about proving the point guys. It's a brilliant stroke of irony that this post is getting silently downvoted instead of anybody giving a substantive response.
- disabled 6y agoThis is how it works with demagoguery: You either outright oppose them as best as you can--or you end up with them and their syncophants.
- burfog 6y agoThat word "far" shouldn't be used to describe what half the population supports. If you bend the definition of "far" well past the breaking point, then these are all far-left positions: universal healthcare, voting by mail, DACA, assault rifle bans, handgun bans, legal abortion, trans recognition... No matter who is president, "far" is not an appropriate word. The president won a popularity contest, and is thus inherently not "far". If half the country is far-right, then the other half must be far-left (to stay calibrated on the center), and "far" has lost all meaning.
- pazimzadeh 6y agoVoting by mail is far left?
- Proven 6y agoGreat job, Mr President! Next: the UN!
- kjsingh 6y agoin line with Make America Great Again..
- NicoJuicy 6y agoLet's be clear here. This is not about China. The US under Trump wants to make billions of profits because of Covid-19. The WHO wants to make the medicine available for free. That's why he is out of the WHO and frankly, if that is the reason, the WHO is better off without the US. Ps. I have no doubt that he would buy the stock of the creator of the vaccine to earn billions with his access to private information.