BBC: Coronavirus: US to halt funding to WHO, says Trump
US President Donald Trump has said he is going to halt funding to the World Health Organization (WHO) because it has "failed in its basic duty" in its response to the coronavirus outbreak.
[...] Mr Trump has been under fire for his own handling of the pandemic.
He has sought to deflect persistent criticism that he acted too slowly to stop the virus's spread by pointing to his decision in late January to place restrictions on travel from China.
[...] The US is the global health body's largest single funder and gave it more than $400m in 2019.
A decision on whether the US resumes funding will be made after the review, which Mr Trump said would last 60 to 90 days.
[...] China gave about $86m in 2018-19; UK gives most of any country apart from the US
[...] The organisation launched an appeal in March for $675m to help fight the pandemic and is reported to be planning a fresh appeal for at least $1bn.
Reuters: Trump halts World Health Organization funding amid coronavirus pandemic
President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he would halt funding to the World Health Organization over its handling of the coronavirus pandemic while his administration reviews its response to the global crisis.
Trump told a White House news conference the WHO had “failed in its basic duty and it must be held accountable.” He said the group had promoted China’s “disinformation” about the virus that likely led to a wider outbreak of the virus than otherwise would have occurred.
[...] The hold on funding was expected. Trump has been increasingly critical of the organization as the global health crisis has continued, and he has reacted angrily to criticism of his administration’s response.
[...] U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said on Tuesday it was “not the time” to reduce resources for the body.
“Now is the time for unity and for the international community to work together in solidarity to stop this virus and its shattering consequences,” he said.
American Medical Association President Dr. Patrice Harris called it “a dangerous step in the wrong direction that will not make defeating COVID-19 easier” and urged Trump to reconsider.
[...] The Republican president recently accused the WHO of being too lenient with China in the earliest days of the crisis, despite having himself praised China in January for its response and transparency.
Trump has made frequent use of scapegoats during his short political career. He often lashes out at the media, Democrats, or others when he feels attacked or under pressure.
The Guardian: Trump turns against WHO to mask his own stark failings on Covid-19 crisis
Donald Trump’s declared suspension of funding of the World Health Organisation in the midst of a pandemic is confirmation – if any were needed – that he is in search of scapegoats for his administration’s much delayed and chaotic response to the crisis.
The US is the WHO’s biggest donor, with funding over $400m a year in both assessed contributions (membership fees) and donations – though it is actually $200m in arrears. [pdf]
Theoretically the White House cannot block funding of international institutions mandated by Congress. But the administration has found ways around such constitutional hurdles on other issues – by simply failing to disburse funds or apply sanctions, for example.
The funding could be formally rescinded, but that would require Senate approval, or “reprogrammed” by being diverted to another purpose that the White House could argue is consistent with the will of Congress.
[...] The WHO director general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, had to fly to Beijing to meet Xi Jinping on 29 January to negotiate entry and information sharing. A WHO team was allowed to visit Wuhan on 22 February. Tedros has been criticised for his flattery of Xi and the Chinese response, in the face of Beijing’s obstructionism and cover-up attempts. His defenders said that such diplomacy was the price for entry.
Trump did more than his own fair share of Xi flattery. On 24 January, the president tweeted “China has been working very hard to contain the coronavirus … The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency.”
The claim that the delay in the WHO acquiring samples crippled the international response is also false. Chinese scientists publicly released the genetic sequence of Covid-19 on 11 January.
[...] By early February the WHO was in a position to distribute a Covid-19 test worldwide, but the US government opted not to have it fast-tracked through approval. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) instead produced its own test at about the same time, but it was flawed and had to be recalled. US testing would be set back more than six weeks compared to the rest of the world.
While virtually no testing was under way in the US throughout February, Trump assumed the consequently low number of confirmed US cases meant that his country had somehow escaped. “The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA,” he boasted on 24 February, nearly a month after the WHO declaration of emergency. “We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries. CDC & World Health [Organisation] have been working hard and very smart. Stock Market starting to look very good to me!”
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday April 16 2020, @01:01AM (2 children)
What a good example of righteous indignation.
Rrrright... that's like $1.35 per person (given "The US is the global health body's largest single funder and gave it more than $400m in 2019.")
To put it in terms you understand, that's about the price of 1 to 5 riffle rounds [midwayusa.com], right?
Ummm... lets put the things in perspective, shall we? Can you remind me how much the overhead of health care administration in US health amounts per person*year? Somewhere around $2500 [soylentnews.org], right? If $1.35 is paying through the nose, how wide the trunk you have for the nose not to complain of a $2500 flood.
I mean, look, cutting only 0.08% of what those parasites gobble from you will more than cover US contribution to WHO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday April 16 2020, @02:31AM (1 child)
A buck two eighty is too damned much to give away to an organization that would love to tell us how to live. They demand, demand, demand, and give nothing back to us.
Worse, when called in to keep the peace, the troops instead take a piece - raping all the women they can lay hands on. That is part and parcel with recruiting troops from hellholes around the world.
I've never had any use for the UN.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 5, Touché) by c0lo on Thursday April 16 2020, @03:25AM
I'm confused. Are you saying that the US govt takes from you only "a buck two eighty"?
Or that you prefer an administration that tells you whether or not you'll live at all based on your ability to pay $2500/year just for the administration itself?
(large grin)
(something about the plank in your own eye and the speck in your brother's eye seem applicable. I'm highly tempted to raise the qualification to "an example of idiotic righteous indignation")
(BTW: have you found a GP replacement for the one that retired and the others that refused your insurance?)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0