Viruses don't take a break while governments figure things out
In the long arc of international cooperation, few institutions carry more weight against the invisible threat of infectious disease than the World Health Organization — and this week, the United States stepped back from that partnership. Following President Trump's executive order withdrawing American support, the CDC was directed to immediately cease all communications with the WHO, severing a relationship that has long served as a first line of defense against global outbreaks. The move raises a question as old as governance itself: when nations turn inward, who watches the horizon for the rest of humanity?
- A Sunday evening memo from the CDC's deputy director ordered all staff to stop engaging with the WHO immediately — no working groups, no advisory boards, no cooperative agreements.
- The US is the WHO's largest funder, and the abrupt severance leaves a financial and operational void at a moment when Marburg virus and H5N1 bird flu are actively circulating.
- Trump's administration argues that legal withdrawal notice was already served in 2020, bypassing the federal law requiring one year's notice before defunding — a claim that remains legally contested.
- The CDC's network of early-warning offices in more than 60 countries now faces an uncertain mandate, with staff recalled from WHO posts abroad and no clear guidance on what comes next.
- Global health experts warn that viruses do not pause for diplomatic disputes, and that gaps in surveillance infrastructure created now could allow containable outbreaks to become uncontrollable ones.
On a Sunday evening, the CDC's deputy director for global health sent senior leadership a memo with a single, unambiguous directive: all communication with the World Health Organization was to stop, effective immediately. The order flowed directly from President Trump's January 20 executive order initiating a US withdrawal from the WHO. Staff engaged through technical working groups, coordinating centers, or cooperative agreements — whether in person or online — were told to stand down and await further instruction.
The legal ground beneath the move is contested. Federal law ordinarily requires a full year's notice before the US can defund the WHO, but the Trump administration contends that notice was already given during his first term in 2020, making an immediate exit permissible. The White House, CDC, WHO, and Department of Health and Human Services all declined to comment.
What gives the order its weight is the scope of what it disrupts. The CDC operates early-warning offices in more than 60 countries — a surveillance infrastructure designed to catch infectious disease threats before they spread. At this moment, both Marburg virus and H5N1 bird flu are circulating in animal populations globally, making that network anything but a formality.
Dr. Lawrence Gostin, a global health law expert at Georgetown University who runs a WHO coordinating center, described the directive as reckless. He noted that recalling CDC staff from WHO offices abroad compounds the damage, and that if the administration's goal is to renegotiate its relationship with the WHO, there are far less disruptive ways to pursue it. Viruses, he observed, do not wait for governments to resolve their differences — and an outbreak that goes undetected today may be far harder to contain tomorrow.
On Sunday evening, the CDC's deputy director for global health sent a memo to senior leadership with a stark instruction: stop talking to the World Health Organization, effective immediately. The order came as a direct consequence of President Trump's executive order on January 20, which initiated a US withdrawal from the WHO. Dr. John Nkengasong's memo left no room for interpretation. All CDC staff engaged with the organization through technical working groups, coordinating centers, advisory boards, or cooperative agreements—whether in person or online—were to halt their work and wait for further direction.
The timing matters because the US is the WHO's largest financial supporter, and federal law ordinarily requires a full year of notice before the country can stop funding the organization. Trump's administration has argued that legal notice was already provided during his first term in 2020, making an immediate withdrawal legally permissible. The White House, the CDC, the WHO, and the Department of Health and Human Services all declined to comment on the directive.
What makes this order consequential is the scale of the CDC's global footprint. The agency maintains a network of offices in more than 60 countries. These outposts serve as an early warning system for infectious disease outbreaks—the kind of surveillance infrastructure that can mean the difference between containing a threat and watching it spread. Right now, Marburg virus and H5N1 bird flu are circulating in animal populations around the world. The absence of coordinated international communication about these threats creates a vulnerability that experts say is difficult to overstate.
Dr. Lawrence Gostin, a global health law expert at Georgetown University who runs a WHO coordinating center, called the move reckless. He told CNN that ordering the CDC to stop working with the WHO on disease response is essentially asking the agency to abandon its post while fires are still burning. He also noted that Trump's order includes a recall of all CDC staff currently stationed at WHO offices abroad—a detail that compounds the disruption.
Gostin acknowledged that if Trump is attempting to negotiate better terms with the WHO, there are more strategic ways to pursue that goal. But the current approach, he argued, amounts to stepping away from the fight against infectious disease while that fight is still active. Viruses, he pointed out, do not pause while governments sort out their diplomatic differences. The risk is that by the time the US and WHO resolve their relationship, an outbreak that could have been detected and contained early will have already spread beyond control.
Citas Notables
Ordering CDC not to work with WHO to put out fires is going to make Americans far more vulnerable, especially with lethal Marburg virus and H5N1 bird flu spreading in animals around the world.— Dr. Lawrence Gostin, global health expert at Georgetown University
Viruses don't take a break from circulating while the White House figures out its next move. You don't quit the battle while you're trying to figure something out, because the enemy—which is the virus—is still circulating and causing mayhem.— Dr. Lawrence Gostin
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does it matter that the CDC stops talking to the WHO right now, specifically?
Because disease doesn't wait. The CDC has people in 60 countries watching for outbreaks. If they can't share what they're seeing with the WHO, the global system for early warning breaks down.
But couldn't the US just rejoin later if things change?
Theoretically, yes. But by then you've lost months of surveillance and coordination. An outbreak detected early can be contained. The same outbreak, detected late, becomes a pandemic.
What's the legal argument Trump is making?
He says notice was given in 2020 during his first term, so the withdrawal can happen immediately instead of waiting a year. The WHO and others dispute whether that notice was valid.
Is there any chance this is a negotiating tactic?
Possibly. But Gostin's point is that you don't negotiate by abandoning your position in the middle of a crisis. You stay engaged while you figure out what you want.
What happens to the CDC staff stationed overseas?
They're being recalled. So the US loses not just communication with the WHO but also its own people on the ground in those 60 countries.
And right now there are actual outbreaks happening?
Yes. Marburg and H5N1 are spreading in animals globally. The timing of this withdrawal, from a public health standpoint, is the worst possible moment.