Several WHO member states about to join the Executive Board have dubious human rights records, but they will shortlist Director General candidates at the Organization’s most consequential period in a generation.

The World Health Organization (WHO) Executive Board does not make headlines. It should. This is the body that screens Director General candidates, whittles the field down to three, and presents them to the World Health Assembly (WHA) for confirmation.

Whoever is confirmed to the board at this year’s WHA in Geneva in May will have an outsized say in who leads the world’s most important health organization at arguably its most precarious moment. And precarious is putting it kindly. Member states are fleeing, including the historically largest donor, the United States, which said it had officially completed its withdrawal in January. 

Right now, across all six WHO regions, the deals are being done to determine who fills the rotating seats on the board’s 34-member roster, with 10 members rotating out in 2026 and 10 new ones taking their place.

EB will select three DG candidates 

So why does any of this matter? The countries entering the Executive Board in 2026 will screen the Director General (DG) candidates and narrow the field to three finalists before the full WHA makes its final call in 2027. 

That process begins this year. Any serious candidate already knows it. As Health Policy Watch reported in February, those with their eye on the top job are already touring capitals, working the conference circuit, and calling in favors – with exactly the countries now taking their seats on this board. 

They still need the golden ticket: a formal nomination from their own Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and that clock starts the moment Tedros issues his call for candidates, anticipated later this month.

The question is whether the incoming countries will have the mettle to reverse the damage done to the organization, or whether they will simply provide fresh cover for an institution that is at risk – budget-wise and politically – before a new DG even gets the chance to restore some credibility. 

China in the new EB line-up

So who do we have? Up first is the Western Pacific Region (WPRO). At the 76th session of the WPRO, held behind closed doors in Nadi, Fiji, in October 2025, member states made a little-publicized decision to nominate China to WHA 2026, replacing Australia, whose term expires next month.

The closed-door nature of the proceedings suggests this was contentious, a reading reinforced by the chair’s report, which notes that the equitable distribution of seats within WPRO will be revisited for a final decision sometime in 2026. 

What exactly happened in that room? The context matters. Former WPRO Regional Director Takeshi Kasai was terminated following allegations of misconduct, leaving the region reeling and lacking leadership. 

One could reasonably assume that both Indonesia, which recently and controversially opted to depart WHO’s South East Asia Region (SEARO) for WPRO, and New Zealand, had their own ambitions for a board seat.

The internal turmoil is likely to have done little to smooth the path to consensus on China’s nomination.

European region

Then we head to the European Region, where Georgia and the United Kingdom have been allocated Executive Board seats beginning May 2026. Yes, the UK is still in WHO’s far-flung European Region of 53 member states, which extends from Iceland eastward to the Russian Federation and Central Asian republics. The UK and Georgia will replace Switzerland and Ukraine whose terms end this month. 

You really have to read the fine print to find this, and scratch around in Georgian news to confirm it. The UK’s inclusion is unsurprising. Based on Resolution EUR/RC53/R1, permanent members of the UN Security Council within the European Region are entitled to Executive Board membership for three out of every six years. 

France, on the same basis, is already confirmed to follow in 2027. Worth noting too that Ukraine loses its board seat while its medical facilities and civilian infrastructure continue to be bombed by Russia, a detail that speaks for itself. Reports indicate that Russia stood as a competing candidate for the seat ultimately won by Georgia, meaning it was not afforded the same rotating privileges extended to the United Kingdom and France.

African and Eastern Mediterranean Regions

Over in the African Region, four out, four in: Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mozambique, and South Sudan replace Togo, Cameroon, Comoros, and Lesotho respectively, with Cote d’Ivoire also tapped to serve as Vice-Chair of the Executive Board from the 159th session onwards.

From the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMRO), Qatar completes its term at the close of the 79th World Health Assembly in 2026, with Kuwait set to take its seat through to May 2029.

Question marks in South East Asia and Americas

All four regions – Africa, EMRO, EURO and WPRO – have now published their nominations, though they are buried deep inside the archives of WHO’s never-ending pile of papers. 

Two question marks remain. First, who will replace the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK)  from SEARO? Given the region’s smaller size, the list of viable candidates is short. Replacing one pariah with another in the form of Myanmar seems unlikely. The Maldives has limited diplomatic capacity. That leaves India, Sri Lanka, or Bangladesh, given Nepal and Thailand still have time left on their existing terms. 

If India is paying attention, and it almost certainly is, it may well calculate that with China joining the board, it cannot afford to remain aloof. The cold diplomatic war between the two countries, and their competing claims to the title of pharmacy of the world, gives India every reason to want influence over an organization that can directly shape that designation.

Second, the Americas. With Barbados going out, logic suggests another Caribbean nation could come in, but no reporting has yet confirmed a nomination. Jamaica or Trinidad and Tobago would both have the diplomatic capacity to make a push and represent the region credibly. And notably, the United States will not be at the table, given their recent exit from the WHO.

The board that emerges from Geneva in May will be imperfect. Based on historical precedent, including the DPRK being confirmed to the board three years ago despite its status as a global health pariah, it is hard to see any of the proposed names being rejected.

That said, several of the countries to be represented have human rights records that would raise eyebrows anywhere else. But they will help decide who leads WHO through its most consequential period in a generation. The world will be watching. One can only hope they set politics aside and do what the role demands: govern.

Following WHA 2026, the Executive Board is expected to be composed of the following Member States:

Staying on (continuing terms):

•   AFRO: Cabo Verde (2025-2028), Central African Republic (2025-2028), Zimbabwe (2024-2027)
•   AMRO/ PAHO: Chile (2024-2027), Costa Rica (2024-2027), El Salvador (2025-2028), Haiti (2025-2028), Panama (2025-2028)
•   SEARO: Nepal (2025-2028), Thailand (2024-2027)
•   EURO: Bulgaria (2024-2027), Israel (2024-2027), Norway (2024-2027), Poland (2024-2027), Serbia (2025-2028), Spain (2025-2028)
•   EMRO: Egypt (2025-2028), Lebanon (2024-2027), Saudi Arabia (2025-2028), Somalia (2024-2027)
•   WPRO: Brunei Darussalam (2024-2027), Japan (2025-2028), Republic of Korea (2024-2027), Solomon Islands (2025-2028)

Rotating in from May 2026:

•   AFRO: Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mozambique, South Sudan
•   AMRO: TBC (replacing Barbados)
•   SEARO: TBC (replacing DPRK)
•   EURO: United Kingdom, Georgia (replacing Switzerland, Ukraine)
•   EMRO: Kuwait (replacing Qatar)
•   WPRO: China (replacing Australia).

Image Credits: WHO/X.