In a decisive move underscoring its America-first foreign policy, the Trump administration formally withdrew from 66 multilateral institutions through an executive order signed Wednesday. Approximately half of these entities operate under the United Nations umbrella, spanning critical areas from climate governance to counterterrorism initiatives.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified the unprecedented withdrawal in an official statement, characterizing these organizations as “redundant, mismanaged, wasteful, and poorly run.” He further asserted that many had been “captured by interests advancing agendas contrary to our own” and posed threats to “our nation’s sovereignty, freedoms, and general prosperity.” The administration declared an end to the era of American taxpayer dollars flowing to foreign interests with minimal tangible returns.
The list of exited organizations reflects established policy priorities, including withdrawals from climate-focused bodies like the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 24/7 Carbon-Free Energy Compact, aligning with the administration’s promotion of traditional energy sources. However, the withdrawal extended beyond predictable targets to include entities with historically bipartisan American support, such as the UN register of conventional arms and the office dedicated to children in armed conflict.
Paolo Von Schirach of the Global Policy Institute interpreted the move as a logical extension of the administration’s preference for bilateral engagement over multilateral forums, which it views as inefficient and ineffective. This action continues a pattern of disengagement from international institutions that began during Trump’s first term with exits from UNESCO, the UN Human Rights Council, and the termination of funding for UNRWA, primarily citing anti-Israel bias.
The implications extend beyond symbolism. Organizations like Civicus, a global civil society alliance, warned the order “poses severe implications for people of the US and the world,” stalling progress on human rights and sustainable development. Analysts noted the withdrawal creates a strategic vacuum, potentially allowing powers like China, which openly champions multilateralism, to exert greater influence within these UN bodies. Daniel Forti of The Crisis Group highlighted the particular significance of abandoning the Peace Building Commission, noting the striking symbolism of a founding architect of the post-WWII order stepping back from the very institutions it helped establish.