President Donald Trump signed a memorandum on Wednesday ordering the United States’ withdrawal from more than 60 international organizations that he described as being “contrary to the interests of the United States.”
The move comes nearly one year after Trump issued Executive Order 14199 directing Secretary of State Marco Rubio to review all international intergovernmental organizations that the United States is involved in financially or otherwise “to determine which organizations, conventions, and treaties are contrary to the interests” of the US.
Upon reviewing Rubio’s subsequent report, Trump determined the best course of action was to end the United States’ participation in and funding of 31 United Nations entities and 35 non-UN organizations, the president’s memorandum said.
Trump Withdraws for America First
Of the 66 organizations targeted by Trump, many are associated with what would typically be considered left-wing initiatives, including the UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, the 24/7 Carbon-Free Energy Compact, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
Ultimately, this decision is about prioritizing the America First agenda, according to the White House. American taxpayers have been forced to spend billions of dollars on dozens of international organizations. Even worse, many of those groups “criticize U.S. policies, advance agendas contrary to our values, or waste taxpayer dollars by purporting to address important issues but not achieving any real results.” Maybe US tax dollars will now be used to benefit Americans before the international community.
It’s Trump’s World, We’re Just Living in It
On the same day that Trump issued the new memorandum, the president told the New York Times that his global power was only limited by his “own morality,” adding, “I don’t need international law.”
Are such comments rather bold? Sure. But are they defensible? To answer that question, let’s take a look at Trump’s track record on the global stage.
Less than one week ago, the president’s team pulled off an unbelievable military operation in Venezuela, plucking dictator Nicolás Maduro from what Trump described as a “fortress” in the middle of the night.
In another astonishing mission, Trump ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. With the help of stealth bombers and bunker-buster bombs, key sites in Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan were significantly damaged.
Just months into his second term, Trump secured a peace deal between Israel and Hamas that facilitated the release of the remaining living hostages in Gaza. That same year, Trump helped broker a ceasefire agreement between Thailand and Cambodia.
In his first term, Trump assisted with the creation of a peace pact between Serbia and Kosovo. And who could forget Trump’s Abraham Accords, a series of historic agreements that established diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco.
Now back to our question: Does Trump limit his global power through personal morality rather than international law? He has certainly demonstrated the ability to execute remarkable military and diplomatic maneuvers. Yet he has also shown restraint, using that power selectively and, one could easily argue, morally.
Trump’s record suggests his goal is to achieve peace and advance US interests in the process. If 66 organizations are distracting from that purpose, withdrawing from them might be the right move.
Millions of Americans voted for Trump because he vowed to put America first. The only question that remains is: Are there more wasteful international organizations that the US can kick to the curb?
