Trump Withdraws U.S. From 66 Global Bodies in America First Pivot

(UNITED STATES) — Former President Donald Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum on January 7, 2026 ordering the United States to withdraw from 66 international organizations, a sweeping move the administration framed as a renewed “America First” shift away from multilateral engagement.

The directive told U.S. executive departments and agencies to end membership, funding or participation “as soon as possible,” targeting 35 non‑UN organizations and 31 United Nations and UN‑affiliated entities.

Memorandum title and rationale

The memorandum is titled “Withdrawing the United States from International Organizations, Conventions, and Treaties That Are Contrary to the Interests of the United States.” After reviewing a report, Trump wrote that:

“it is contrary to the interests of the United States to remain a member of, participate in, or otherwise provide support” to the listed bodies.

The White House fact sheet framed the withdrawals as ending U.S. involvement in entities that “advance globalist agendas over U.S. priorities” or handle issues “inefficiently or ineffectively.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the targets as:

“redundant in their scope, mismanaged, unnecessary, wasteful, poorly run, captured by the interests of actors advancing their own agendas contrary to our own, or a threat to our nation’s sovereignty, freedoms, and general prosperity.”

The administration also pointed to sovereignty and funding concerns in its broader rationale. A White House review found some international bodies:

• “Undermine U.S. sovereignty,”
• “Lack accountability or measurable outcomes,” and
• “Require continued U.S. funding without proportional benefit.”

Review and legal framing

The memorandum noted that Secretary of State Marco Rubio completed the review ordered by Executive Order 14199 on February 4, 2025. That order is titled “Withdrawing the United States from and Ending Funding to Certain United Nations Organizations and Reviewing United States Support to All International Organizations.”

Trump’s memorandum directed all agencies to “take immediate steps” to carry out the withdrawals. For UN entities, it defined withdrawal as:

• “ceasing participation in or funding to those entities to the extent permitted by law.”

Legal analysts cited in the material pointed out that some exits—especially those tied to treaty‑based frameworks—could face judicial or legislative challenges. The material also notes that some withdrawal steps may be slower or partial where Congress has mandated participation or funding.

A State Department statement described the withdrawals as proceeding “consistent with applicable international obligations and U.S. law,” according to the material. It also said “review of additional international organizations remains ongoing.”

Implementation steps and immediate actions

The next steps described include:

1. Formal withdrawal notifications.
2. Termination of funding streams.
3. Reassignment or reduction of diplomatic engagement.

The directive also contemplates agencies ending:

• staff secondments,
• committee work, and
• technical participation, including U.S. experts serving on panels.

The memorandum’s implementation language leaves room for legal constraints by instructing agencies to cease participation or funding only “to the extent permitted by law.”

Scope and foreign policy implications

The scale of the pullback marks one of the most far‑reaching rollbacks of U.S. participation in international institutions described in the material as occurring in modern history. The administration described the move as prioritising national sovereignty, fiscal restraint and bilateral diplomacy.

Supporters said the policy would reduce financial commitments and allow the United States to focus on domestic priorities. Critics warned of a loss of global influence and said withdrawals would reduce U.S. involvement in global norm‑setting and agenda‑setting across climate science, development, governance and other areas.

Allied governments expressed concern that U.S. absence could weaken coordinated responses to climate change and global crises. Policy experts warned that withdrawal may allow other major powers to expand influence within these institutions.

The material describes a shift toward bilateral and domestic channels in place of multilateral engagement, aligning with the administration’s “America First” posture. Trump’s memorandum instructs agencies to implement the changes across the federal government.

The White House also highlighted earlier moves described in the material, including a re‑exit from the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization upon Trump’s return to office. The administration framed those steps as rejecting “globalist climate and health bureaucracies,” according to the fact sheet described in the text.

Organizations targeted: overview

• Total organizations: 66
• Non‑UN organizations: 35
• United Nations / UN‑affiliated entities: 31

Non‑UN organizations (35)

Among the 35 non‑UN organizations listed in the memorandum are:

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
• International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
• International Solar Alliance (ISA)
• International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
• Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21)
• Global Counterterrorism Forum
• Global Forum on Cyber Expertise
• Global Forum on Migration and Development
• Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia (ReCAAP)
• Commission for Environmental Cooperation
• Freedom Online Coalition
• Venice Commission of the Council of Europe
• 24/7 Carbon‑Free Energy Compact
• Colombo Plan Council
• Education Cannot Wait
• European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats
• Forum of European National Highway Research Laboratories
• Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund
• Inter‑American Institute for Global Change Research
• Intergovernmental Science‑Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)
• International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM)
• International Cotton Advisory Committee
• International Development Law Organization (IDLO)
• International Energy Forum
• International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies
• International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA)
• International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law
• International Lead and Zinc Study Group
• International Tropical Timber Organization
• Pan American Institute of Geography and History
• Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation
• Regional Cooperation Council
• Science and Technology Center in Ukraine
• Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP)

United Nations and UN‑affiliated entities (31)

The 31 United Nations and UN‑affiliated entities listed include:

• United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA)
• UN Population Fund (UNFPA)
• UN Register of Conventional Arms
• United Nations University
• UN bodies linked to UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), including regional commissions for:
• Africa,
• Asia and the Pacific,
• Europe,
• Latin America and the Caribbean, and
• Western Asia
• International Law Commission
• International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals
• UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB)
• UN System Staff College
• UN‑Water
• UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
• UN Democracy Fund (UNDEF)
• UN Energy
• UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women)
• UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
• UN Human Settlements Programme (UN‑Habitat)
• UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR)
• and “additional commissions, coordination mechanisms, and subsidiary bodies” covering development, social policy, governance, and institutional coordination.

Areas affected: sector summaries

• Climate and environment:
• Non‑UN: IPCC, IRENA, ISA, REN21, IUCN, IPBES, Commission for Environmental Cooperation.
• UN: UNFCCC.
• Development and social policy:
• Education Cannot Wait, UNFPA.
• UN list also includes UN Women and several UN development and social commissions.
• Governance and rule of law:
• International IDEA, International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law, Venice Commission, UNDEF, and other UN mechanisms focused on governance and institutional coordination.

Political framing and public messaging

Rubio amplified the administration’s political framing in quoted statements and social‑media posts, calling the targets “anti‑American, useless, or wasteful international organizations.” The White House fact sheet said the administration believed U.S. dollars were “best allocated in other ways.”

The administration argues many targeted bodies promote policies inconsistent with U.S. national interests or duplicate functions that can be handled domestically or bilaterally.

Critics, as described in the material, warned the withdrawals would reduce U.S. involvement in global norm‑setting and agenda‑setting in areas ranging from climate science to development and governance.

Legal and congressional considerations

• The memorandum instructs agencies to cease participation or funding only “to the extent permitted by law.”
• Legal analysts expect some exits—especially those tied to treaty obligations—could face future judicial or legislative challenges.
• Some withdrawal steps may be slower or partial where Congress has mandated participation or funding.

International response and longer‑term effects

Allied governments expressed concern the U.S. absence could weaken coordinated global responses to climate change and crises. Policy experts warned the withdrawals may allow other major powers to expand their influence within these institutions.

The material said the withdrawals represent a structural shift in U.S. foreign policy posture, at least for the duration of the directive. Future administrations may revisit some decisions, but the implementation steps are designed to take effect “as soon as possible,” as the memorandum directs.