“America First” — The doctrine that reshaped U.S. engagement with the United Nations and multilateral institutions.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive orders have significantly reshaped America’s involvement in the United Nations, triggering a major shift in global diplomacy. The directives led to funding cuts and withdrawals from key organizations including the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC), UNESCO, and defunding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA).
The administration justified these actions citing inefficiency, financial mismanagement, and political bias within U.N. bodies. However, critics warn of long-term consequences on humanitarian efforts and U.S. diplomatic influence, with China and Russia filling the resulting power vacuum.
🎯 Why Did Trump Cut U.N. Funding?
The Trump administration viewed the U.N. as an inefficient bureaucracy that often worked against U.S. interests. Three main reasons were cited for the funding cuts and withdrawals:
1. Alleged Political Bias: Trump argued that bodies like the UNHRC disproportionately targeted Israel while ignoring human rights violations in countries like China, Iran, and Venezuela.
2. Financial Mismanagement: The U.S. was the largest contributor to U.N. programs, funding approximately 22% of the regular budget and 28% of peacekeeping efforts. The order aimed to reduce what was seen as disproportionate financial burden on American taxpayers.
3. National Sovereignty Concerns: The administration believed U.S. foreign policy should be driven by direct bilateral alliances rather than multilateral institutions.
Think of the U.N. as a large club where members pay dues based on their wealth. The U.S. was paying the largest share (22-28%) but felt the club was making decisions that went against American and Israeli interests. Trump decided to reduce payments and quit some committees (UNHRC, UNESCO) while staying in the main club. It’s like paying less for a gym membership while boycotting classes you disagree with.
| Organization | Action | Year | Reason Cited |
|---|---|---|---|
| UNHRC | Formal Withdrawal | 2018 | Anti-Israel bias; poor member composition |
| UNESCO | Withdrawal | 2017 | Anti-Israel resolutions; unfair funding |
| UNRWA | Defunded ($300M cut) | 2018 | Inefficiency; alleged Hamas ties |
| Peacekeeping | Budget cuts | 2017-2020 | Financial burden on U.S. |
⚖️ Withdrawal from U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC)
In 2018, the U.S. formally withdrew from the U.N. Human Rights Council, citing multiple concerns:
- Anti-Israel Bias: The council passed numerous resolutions condemning Israel while failing to take strong action against other human rights violators
- Lack of Reform: U.S. demands for transparency and accountability reforms were not met
- Member Composition Issues: The council included countries like China, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela — nations with poor human rights records themselves
- Agenda Item 7: A permanent agenda item specifically targeting Israel, unique among all U.N. member states
The UNHRC has 47 member states elected by the U.N. General Assembly. Critics argue that countries with poor human rights records can get elected and then block criticism of themselves. Supporters argue that engagement — even with imperfect partners — is better than withdrawal. The U.S. withdrawal left a seat that could be filled by countries less committed to human rights.
🏥 Defunding UNRWA: Impact on Palestinian Refugees
The Trump administration cut $300 million in U.S. aid to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), which provides education, healthcare, and social services to millions of Palestinian refugees.
Reasons Cited:
- Ineffectiveness: Critics claimed UNRWA perpetuated rather than solved the refugee crisis
- Alleged Hamas Ties: Israel accused UNRWA of employing individuals affiliated with the militant group
- Lack of Financial Transparency: U.S. argued aid should go to organizations with stricter oversight
- Refugee Definition: Disagreement over UNRWA’s definition of “refugee” which includes descendants
Impact: The funding cut led to severe financial crises, reducing access to food, healthcare, and education for approximately 5.7 million registered Palestinian refugees.
Don’t confuse: UNHRC (Human Rights Council) is different from UNRWA (Palestinian refugee agency). The U.S. WITHDREW from UNHRC but DEFUNDED UNRWA — it didn’t “withdraw” from UNRWA as the U.S. was a donor, not a member. Also, UNESCO withdrawal was in 2017 (earlier than UNHRC in 2018).
🌍 Global Reactions to Trump’s U.N. Policy
The U.S. decisions triggered varied responses across the international community:
| Actor | Response | Key Concern |
|---|---|---|
| United Nations | Deep concern expressed | Humanitarian efforts at risk |
| European Allies (Germany, France) | Criticized funding cuts | Impact on humanitarian programs |
| Canada, Japan | Urged reconsideration | Importance of multilateralism |
| China & Russia | Expanded U.N. influence | Filled power vacuum |
| Amnesty International, HRW | Condemned withdrawals | Accountability for human rights |
Key Consequence: Trump’s withdrawals created a power vacuum that China and Russia quickly exploited by increasing their influence within U.N. bodies. This is a frequently tested concept — the unintended consequence of U.S. disengagement from multilateral institutions.
📊 Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy
1. Diminished Global Influence: U.S. withdrawals reduced its ability to shape international policies and norms from within multilateral institutions.
2. Financial Shifts in Humanitarian Aid: Other countries had to step up contributions, but significant funding gaps remained, particularly affecting Palestinian refugees.
3. Bilateral Over Multilateral: The “America First” strategy emphasized direct negotiations with individual allies rather than working through U.N. institutions.
4. Biden Administration Reversal: President Joe Biden later rejoined the UNHRC and restored UNRWA funding, signaling a return to multilateral engagement.
The U.S.-U.N. relationship illustrates the tension between national sovereignty and multilateral cooperation. Consider: Can the world’s largest economy and military power effectively pursue its interests through bilateral deals alone? Or does disengagement from multilateral institutions ultimately weaken global influence and create space for rival powers?
Click to flip • Master key facts
For GDPI, Essay Writing & Critical Analysis
5 questions • Instant feedback
The U.S. withdrew from the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in 2018, citing anti-Israel bias and poor member composition.
The U.S. contributes approximately 22% of the regular U.N. budget — the largest single contributor.
Trump cut $300 million in funding to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees).
The U.S. withdrew from UNESCO in 2017 — one year before the UNHRC withdrawal in 2018.
Biden rejoined the UNHRC and restored UNRWA funding in 2021, reversing Trump’s withdrawals.
