US President Donald Trump has instructed the United States to exit 66 international organizations, representing one of the most significant reductions in involvement with multilateral institutions in recent US history.
This decision was revealed on Wednesday via a White House Fact Sheet dated January 7, 2026.
The document states that Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing US agencies to cease participation in and funding for organizations that the administration claims no longer align with American interests.
According to the White House, the withdrawal affects 35 non-UN organizations and 31 UN bodies, which are said to operate against US national interests, security, economic growth, or sovereignty.
This action follows a comprehensive review of all international organizations, treaties, and agreements that the United States supports or funds.
The administration’s goal is to stop using taxpayer money on institutions it believes prioritize global agendas over US interests.
Read Also:
- Army chief warns Trump, Netanyahu against interfering in Iran’s affairs
- European allies back Denmark over Trump’s threat to annex Greenland
- Trump claims US oil firms could start operating in Venezuela within 18 months
The White House accused many of these organizations of promoting policies that conflict with American values, including those related to climate change and global governance. It noted that despite spending billions over the years, the benefits to the United States have been minimal.
Positioning this action as a move to reclaim American sovereignty, the administration emphasized Trump’s commitment to ensuring that international engagement directly benefits the country.
This withdrawal aligns with Trump’s broader foreign policy strategy since returning to office. Previously, he had pulled the US out of the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Agreement, rejected the OECD Global Tax Deal, and withdrawn from the UN Human Rights Council while cutting funding to UNRWA.
The White House indicated that the savings from these withdrawals would be redirected to domestic priorities such as infrastructure, border security, and military readiness.
While critics caution that this decision could diminish US global influence, the administration maintains that it is a recalibration of foreign policy rather than a retreat.
