Although Argentina is withdrawing from the World Health Organization’s global body, it intends to remain an active member in WHO’s regional affiliate, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO),  the country’s representative told the WHO Executive Board on Friday. 

His comments came in the course of a discussion on the legal and policy impacts of Argentina’s declaration in February 2025 that it would leave WHO, following that of the United States last January. Argentina’s official notice, made in March, is due to be discussed at the May World Health Assembly along with the United States withdrawal. 

But the two countries are in somewhat different legal positions vis a vis any WHA response.  In terms of Argentina, there is no explicit provision in WHO’s  Constitution for member states to withdraw, with the exception of the United States, which reserved that right explicitly when it joined in 1948. As for the United States, the US also owes WHO some $260.6 million in unpaid dues for 2024-2025, on which WHA member states could feasibly demand payment before its withdrawal is legally “accepted.”   See related story.

Stars and Stripes No Longer Flying at WHO – But US Can’t Really Leave Until Dues are Paid, Agency Says

Argentina will continue to abide by International Health Regulations on Emergencies

Regardless of the formalities, Argentina’s Ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Carlos Mario Foradori, affirmed that the country would continue to abide by International Health Regulations whereby WHO must be notified of an infectious disease outbreak of epidemic potential. 

“We will not be isolated from the world. We will continue to respect all the rules that exist. We cooperate very closely with the Pan American Health Organization, and we will strengthen this even further,” Foradori said, adding that PAHO’s Director Jarbas Barbosa, is in fact visiting Argentina next week. 

“And it should be clear to the whole membership that we’re not leaving this world. To be very clear, as was mentioned, the pandemic knows no borders, and as a Western civilized country, we understand that we need to respect rules, and work with the whole world.”  Some WHO observers called out Foradori’s reference to a “western civilized country” was as a slight on non-western regions of the world.

So far, the US also has remained in PAHO, of which it was a founding member, and whose existence predates the 1948 formation of WHO by nearly half a century. Historically, the US is also PAHO’s largest funder. 

However, currently the US owes PAHO some 78.5 million in unpaid dues for the 2024-25 fiscal year, and a total of $136.5 million including 2026 dues. In August, meanwhile, the White House ordered cuts in some $45 million to already approved PAHO allocations in protest over a now-discontinued PAHO programme supporting the deployment of Cuban doctors to rural areas of Brazil at sub-market wages and with Cuba’s government reaping financial benefits.  See related story: 

Pan American Health Organization Targeted in New Round of US Funding Cuts

This week’s Congressional passage of a $9.42 billion global health appropriations bill , meanwhile, contained no explicit mention of funding to PAHO. And so it remains to be seen the cutbacks previously ordered by the White House are indeed implemented – as well as how PAHO will be funded for 2026. 

Legally, PAHO is an anomaly amongst WHO’s six regional offices insofar as it operates with its own budget and decision-making structure as a semi-autonomous entity – even though it also serves as a WHO Regional Office. This anomaly, in turn, opens up the unique possibility for nations in the Americas to retain their affiliation with PAHO as a regional organization, whilst disassociating themselves from WHO as a global body.  

No clear way forward on response to member states that withdraw 

The EB discussion did not yield a unanimous recommendation on whether the World Health Assembly should actively ‘accept’ Argentina’s withdrawal – or how to respond to the US withdrawal at a time when Washington stills owe WHO some $360 million in past dues. 

While many WHO member states at the EB meeting stressed that countries had the sovereign right to determine whether they remain in an international organization – others stressed the legal complexities around the issue and the need for further consideration before the WHA must take a position in May.    

Ultimately, the EB agreed to pass onto the WHA a draft resolution co-sponsored by Argentina and Israel, calling on WHO member states to formally acknowledge Argentina’s withdrawal. But some leading member states reserved their final position, asking for further legal analysis and clarification. 

“Argentina’s notification of withdrawal raises numerous issues that do require careful consideration,” said Australia’’s delegate.

Said Switzerland, “We hear that there are still different legal, political, technical questions on the conditions and the implication in this context, on this agenda. ..We would all benefit from additional clarity for the WHA to be able to take an informed decision.”

A report submitted to this Executive Board meeting has already has laid out the key issues relateld to the withdrawal of both Argentina and the US. Effectively, there is no legal provision in the WHO Constitution for a member state to withdraw  – with the exception of the United States, which made that right an explicit condition of its joining in 1948, WHO’s paper notes. 

At the same time, Argentina and other member states argued that broader international legal principles guarantee a country the sovereign right to determine its affiliations in multilateral organizations like WHO.

Australia, Costa Rica, Zimbabwe and other member states also expressed regret over Argentina’s departure from the global body, asking for continued dialogue over its decision and describing Argentina as a valued partner in global health. 

“We request them to reconsider in view of global health security,” said Zimbabwe. 

China says US withdrawal shows lack of ‘leadership’

No such regrets were expressed at Friday’s meeting regarding the US departure. But China described the US move as a lack of leadership, saying:  

“As the most representative and authoritative intergovernmental, international health organization, the WHO bears a significant responsibility in global health governance….Major countries in particular, should lead by example. They should not treat the WHO as something to be used as it fits and abandoned when it does not. Nor should they bypass the WHO and set up alternative mechanisms,” China’s delegate said. 

“Countries should adhere to the rule of law and should not selectively fulfill their international obligations and commitments, and should not place [their] domestic political agenda above international law and governments.”

At the same time, China called for a re-evaluation of WHO rules around the entry and exit of member states from the organization, for which WHO’s 1948 constitution made few provisions, saying: 

“The issue of withdrawal is complex and sensitive. Members cannot enter or exit at their will. At present, there are certain gaps and ambiguity in the WHO’s rule regarding membership changes based on fairness and transparency, necessary adjustments and improvements should be made to better respond to the new circumstances and requirements on global health governance.” 

Israel, meanwhile, said that WHA members should accept the US notice of withdrawal without hinging it to other issues – an indirect reference to the unpaid US dues for 2024-2025.

Said Israel, “Any attempt to compel states against the national decisions is an infringement of their sovereign rights. There is no valid reason to further discuss this matter in any WHO forum. Further discussions only consume the limited resources this organization has without carrying any actual impact on the ground. Other issues of dispute between a member state and the organization do not affect the right of withdrawal in the context of the WHO,” Israel’s delegate said, an apparent reference to the outstanding, unpaid WHO dues still owed by the US.

At Monday’s Executive Board opening, Israel’s EB Representative, Asher Salmon, warned that his country, a close ally of the US, is also under pressure to withdraw from WHO, saying, “in Israel, there are also, unfortunately, strong public voices calling for us to leave the organisation.” 

Claiming that the WHO had become “too politicised,” he called for a “brave conceptual overhaul” of the organization. See related story: 

Days After US Leaves WHO, Israel Warns it Faces Pressure to Withdraw

Image Credits: DavidRockDesign/Pixabay.