UN says U.S. still legally bound to pay dues after Trump exits 66 global bodies
The Trump administration has ordered the U.S. to suspend support or withdraw from 66 international organizations — including 31 U.N.-linked bodies such as the UNFCCC, IPCC and UNFPA — saying the groups are “redundant,” “wasteful” or a threat to U.S. sovereignty while preserving influence in select technical agencies like the ITU, IMO and ILO. The U.N. secretary-general said assessed U.N. dues remain a legal obligation and that officials received no formal notice, while experts warn the move raises open legal questions (notably about unilateral withdrawal from the Senate‑ratified UNFCCC), risks ceding influence to China and could reduce funding for climate and humanitarian programs.
📌 Key Facts
- An executive order following a year-long review directs the U.S. to withdraw support from 66 international organizations, 31 of which are U.N.-linked.
- The exit list includes major climate bodies (the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change and the IPCC), the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA), and non‑U.N. groups such as the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, International IDEA and the Global Counterterrorism Forum; several smaller, largely symbolic bodies were also named.
- The administration, led publicly by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, says the targeted bodies are 'redundant,' 'mismanaged,' 'unnecessary,' 'wasteful' or a 'threat to our nation's sovereignty' and says it will instead concentrate influence in technical standard‑setting bodies it keeps (e.g., ITU, IMO, ILO).
- U.N. officials, including Secretary‑General António Guterres (via spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric), said assessed contributions to the U.N. regular and peacekeeping budgets remain a legal obligation under the U.N. Charter, and reported they received no formal diplomatic notification of the U.S. action, learning of it through media and White House posts.
- Legal experts say it is an open question whether a president can unilaterally withdraw from the Senate‑ratified UNFCCC (ratified 1992); if the U.S. left it would be the only country outside the treaty, and rejoining would require a new two‑thirds Senate ratification.
- Observers warn the withdrawals will cede influence in global institutions—particularly to China—undermine U.S. leadership on climate and rules for the digital/global economy, and have tangible effects because earlier U.S. funding cuts already forced staffing and program reductions at some U.N. agencies and U.S.-funded NGOs.
- Analysts characterize the policy as a crystallization of an 'America First' or 'my way or the highway' approach to multilateralism that mixes symbolic, low‑cost exits with targeted retention of bodies where the U.S. wants to compete; several large U.N. recipients (for example, UNICEF) are not on the exit list.
📊 Relevant Data
China heads four of the 15 principal specialized agencies of the United Nations, including the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which is more than any other country.
China's Role in the United Nations — German Marshall Fund
China's assessed contribution to the UN regular budget increased to roughly 20% in 2025, up from about 12% in 2019, making it the second-largest contributor behind the US at 22%.
How Much Does the U.S. Fund the United Nations? — Council on Foreign Relations
China has increased its participation in international standard-setting organizations, submitting over 30% of proposals in bodies like the ITU for 5G standards between 2020 and 2024, which has helped align global standards with technologies developed by Chinese firms such as Huawei.
Standardizing the future: How can the United States navigate the geopolitics of international technology standards? — Atlantic Council
📰 Source Timeline (9)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time
January 09, 2026
11:10 PM
UN chief says the U.S. has 'legal obligation' to fund agencies after Trump's withdrawal order
New information:
- UN Secretary-General António Guterres, via spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric, states that assessed contributions to the UN regular and peacekeeping budgets remain a 'legal obligation under the UN Charter for all Member States, including the United States.'
- UN officials say they received no formal diplomatic notification from the U.S. about withdrawal from the 31 UN-related agencies and learned of the decision through media and White House social media posts.
- The article notes that UN leaders had previously persuaded Trump not to fully abandon the institution through efforts including a $2 billion humanitarian assistance agreement, but were nevertheless surprised by the latest withdrawal order.
- UN staff say targeted agencies and initiatives will continue operating despite the U.S. announcement, emphasizing a responsibility to 'deliver for those who depend on us.'
- Diplomats at the UN indicate that the new U.S. withdrawal announcement came after a year-long review and follows earlier suspensions of U.S. support for WHO, UNRWA, the UN Human Rights Council and UNESCO.
10:25 PM
Trump exits global bodies in the name of ‘America First.’ Who benefits?
New information:
- Frames explicitly that China is the key beneficiary of the U.S. withdrawal, with experts saying Beijing has been stepping into roles vacated by Washington in global institutions.
- Includes detailed expert analysis from Stewart Patrick of the Carnegie Endowment highlighting that 'power abhors a vacuum' and that China will 'jump in to determine the direction the world will go in.'
- Provides reaction from Rep. Gregory Meeks, ranking member of House Foreign Affairs, warning the withdrawals will cede influence over rules for the global digital economy and raise costs for U.S. businesses.
- Clarifies that not all 66 organizations are central to U.S. interests and cites specific minor bodies (e.g., International Lead and Zinc Study Group, International Cotton Advisory Committee, Forum of European National Highway Research Laboratories) as examples of symbolic cuts.
- Further characterizes the move as serving 'symbolic politics' to satisfy anti‑globalist sentiment at relatively low cost in some cases, adding nuance to the policy motivation beyond the raw list of bodies.
January 08, 2026
9:26 PM
Why is the U.S. pulling out of 31 U.N. groups? And what's the impact?
New information:
- Confirms that 31 of the 66 organizations named in Trump’s executive order are UN entities, and lists categories including UN Women, UN Population Fund and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, plus smaller offices like the SRSG on Violence Against Children.
- Clarifies that major UN bodies such as UNICEF are not on the withdrawal list, underscoring that large recipients of U.S. UN funding are "largely unaddressed" by the order.
- Provides the Trump administration’s stated rationale in the order language that these bodies "undermine America’s independence and waste taxpayer dollars on ineffective or hostile agendas."
- Includes Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s statement arguing that it is no longer acceptable to send such institutions "the blood, sweat, and treasure of the American people, with little to nothing to show for it," and calling them "mismanaged, unnecessary, wasteful and poorly run."
- Quotes a formal UN statement noting that assessed contributions to the UN regular and peacekeeping budgets are a legal obligation under the UN Charter for all member states, including the U.S., despite the White House announcement.
- Adds expert reaction from Nina Schwalbe (Georgetown Center for Global Policy and Politics), who characterizes the move as a broad withdrawal from multilateralism with wide‑ranging implications, and from Brett Schaefer (AEI), who says the move is "pruning around the margins" and a "missed opportunity."
10:30 AM
Trump Pulls U.S. Out of More Than 30 U.N. Bodies
New information:
- This article specifies that 31 of the 66 targeted organizations are U.N.-linked bodies.
- It frames the covered U.N. commissions and climate-related bodies collectively as 'major bodies set up to tackle climate change,' adding emphasis on climate organizations within the 66.
- It reiterates the executive order’s public justification that these groups are 'contrary to the interests of the United States,' consistent with but more concise than prior descriptions.
3:34 AM
U.S. to withdraw from 66 international organizations, White House says
New information:
- CBS specifies that the withdrawal includes the UN population agency (UNFPA) and confirms the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) itself is among the 66 targeted bodies, emphasizing that the U.S. will be the only country outside the treaty.
- The article lists several non‑UN organizations on the exit list — the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, International IDEA and the Global Counterterrorism Forum.
- It adds contextual reporting that prior funding cuts have already forced staffing and program reductions at parts of the UN system and some U.S.-funded NGOs following earlier Trump-era aid reductions through USAID.
- It quotes International Crisis Group’s Daniel Forti saying the move crystallizes a 'my way or the highway' U.S. approach to multilateralism under Trump.
- It notes the administration plans to redirect influence toward standard‑setting UN technical bodies it is keeping, such as the International Telecommunications Union, International Maritime Organization and ILO.
1:53 AM
U.S. to exit 66 international organizations in further retreat from global cooperation
New information:
- AP/NPR article specifies that one key target is 'the U.N. treaty that establishes international climate negotiations' — i.e., the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change infrastructure — confirming the climate-negotiation dimension of the withdrawal.
- Identifies the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA) as among the UN agencies losing U.S. support, expanding the list of affected organizations beyond climate and democracy bodies already noted.
- Provides an on‑the‑record statement from Secretary of State Marco Rubio framing the 66 institutions as 'redundant,' 'mismanaged,' 'unnecessary,' 'wasteful' or a 'threat to our nation's sovereignty, freedoms, and general prosperity.'
- Quotes Daniel Forti of the International Crisis Group characterizing the shift as a 'crystallization' of a 'my way or the highway' U.S. approach to multilateralism.
- Adds contextual linkage to other recent Trump‑era moves that have 'rattled allies,' including the raid capturing Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and open talk of taking over Greenland.
- Reiterates that the administration is taking an 'a‑la‑carte' approach to UN dues, prioritizing bodies like the ITU, IMO and ILO where it wants to compete with China, while withdrawing from others.
1:08 AM
Trump pulls U.S. from 66 global organizations, including key UN climate agencies
New information:
- Confirms that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are explicitly on Trump’s 66‑organization withdrawal list.
- Notes that the UNFCCC is a Senate‑ratified treaty (ratified in 1992 under President George H. W. Bush) and that whether a president can unilaterally withdraw from such a treaty is an 'open legal question,' citing Columbia law professor Michael Gerrard.
- States that if the U.S. leaves, it would be the only one of the UN’s 193 member states outside the UNFCCC and would lose its vote in future treaty decisions, with only observer status possible under a future administration.
- Explains that rejoining the UNFCCC would require a new two‑thirds Senate ratification, described as a 'Herculean effort' in today’s polarized Congress.
- Highlights that the Trump administration was already largely absent from the November UN climate talks in Brazil, signaling this move, and that U.S. funding withdrawals are expected to be the biggest tangible impact for many affected organizations.
- Includes critical reactions from environmental and climate-policy figures such as World Resources Institute’s David Widawsky and former EPA administrator Gina McCarthy, who warn of lost clean‑energy leadership and economic opportunities.
- Clarifies that the International Energy Agency is notably not on the exit list despite earlier tensions with the administration.
12:45 AM
U.S. will leave 66 international organizations as Trump further retreats from global cooperation
New information:
- Article specifies that the order suspends U.S. support for 66 organizations after a broad Trump administration review of all international and UN‑affiliated bodies.
- Names examples of affected entities beyond the UN system, including the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, and the Global Counterterrorism Forum.
- Details that most targeted bodies are UN‑related agencies, commissions and advisory panels focused on climate, labor, migration and issues the administration labels as 'woke' or diversity‑oriented.
- Provides the State Department’s formal justification that these institutions are 'redundant,' 'wasteful,' 'poorly run' or 'a threat to our nation's sovereignty' in a public statement.
- Sets this move in context of prior Trump withdrawals or funding suspensions from WHO, UNRWA, the UN Human Rights Council and UNESCO, and notes broader cuts to USAID foreign assistance.
- Includes analysis/quote from Daniel Forti (International Crisis Group) characterizing the policy as a 'my way or the highway' approach to multilateralism.
January 07, 2026