Argentina has announced its withdrawal from the WHO, citing major differences in handling the COVID-19 response, specifically criticizing the long lockdowns. This decision follows the U.S. withdrawal under Trump, who also accused the WHO of mismanagement during the pandemic. Argentina argues that this move will enhance its sovereignty and improve health policy implementation without external interference.
On February 5, Argentine President Javier Milei announced that Argentina would withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO), following the lead of former U.S. President Donald Trump. This decision was communicated by presidential spokesperson Manuel Adorni, who indicated that the withdrawal is due to significant disagreements over the COVID-19 pandemic response, particularly criticizing the extended lockdowns imposed during the crisis.
Adorni stated that the Argentine government would not permit an international organization to influence its sovereignty or public health strategies. The administration accused the WHO of causing economic strain by advocating for prolonged quarantines during the pandemic.
Argentina reported over 10 million COVID-19 cases, resulting in more than 130,000 deaths, making it one of the hardest-hit countries in the Americas, second only to the U.S. and Brazil. Adorni highlighted that despite the WHO’s operations in Argentina, the country does not fund the organization directly, indicating that their withdrawal would not compromise healthcare service quality.
The Argentine administration anticipates that withdrawing from the WHO will enable greater autonomy to implement health policies that align with national interests, allowing for better allocation of resources. This stance mirrors Trump’s previous criticisms of the WHO, which he accused of mishandling the pandemic and succumbing to political pressures.
Trump’s executive order to withdraw from the WHO, issued on January 20, highlighted similar grievances about the organization’s management during the pandemic, albeit requiring a year for full withdrawal. While the U.S. halted its funding to the WHO, the financial obligations remain for that duration, contrasting Argentina’s swift decision to exit.
In 2020, the WHO faced global scrutiny over its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly regarding its initial response and recommendations. With countries experiencing significant outbreaks, tensions rose, leading some nations, including the U.S. under Trump, to question the organization’s authority and effectiveness. Argentina’s recent move reflects a growing trend among countries scrutinizing international health governance in favor of national autonomy, particularly in combating COVID-19’s effects. COVID-19 disproportionately impacted Latin America, causing severe socioeconomic and health implications, which likely fueled Milei’s administration to take decisive, independent action. The pandemic has highlighted the intricate relationship between public health policies and international organizations, driving nations to reconsider their participation in global health initiatives based on perceived outcomes and governance issues.
Argentina’s withdrawal from the WHO underscores a growing sentiment among some nations to prioritize national interests over international health collaboration, particularly in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. By following Trump’s example, the Milei administration asserts its commitment to sovereignty and aims for more flexible and tailored health policies. This decision might reflect broader trends in global health governance as countries navigate the balance between collaboration and nationalism in public health strategy.
Original Source: www.latintimes.com
