USA is the largest donor of W H O for several years and any donor has the right to question the functioning style of W H O, if the donor country has any suspicion about it.
by N.S.Venkataraman
Section of media has reported that some countries like China, Russia and some countries in European Union have protested against US President’s decision to suspend donation to W H O. However, a number of other countries like Japan, Australia have all saw the merit in Trump’s decision to stop donation to W H O and have not been critical.
There is no doubt that there is world wide disappointment about the performance and moves of W H O with regard to the COVID 19 crisis. There is widespread view that W H O has been considerate to China with regard to China’s claim on COVID 19, for whatever reasons.
The Australian Prime Minister has condemned the W H O’s supportive stance on wet market in China. Australian Prime Minister clearly echoed the world wide view, when he said that W H O’s support for the reopening of China’s wet market after the deadly coronavirus originated in Wuhan region, is unfathomable.
President Trump has convincingly explained his justification for stopping the donation to W H O. He has clearly said that present functioning style of W H O is China centric and Trump has expressed his misgivings about the motives of the present leadership of W H O and expressed his suspicion about it’s honesty of purpose at the present time, in so many words.
USA is the largest donor of W H O for several years and any donor has the right to question the functioning style of W H O, if the donor country has any suspicion about it. As the largest donor to W H O , USA certainly has a strong case to question W H O , if it suspects it’s motives at any time.
If some countries are critical of President Trump’s decision to stop the donation to W H O, these criticizing countries can increase their donation to compensate for the “loss of donation” to W H O due to the decision of President Trump. While China has said that it would fill the gap, so far it has not said to what extent it would increase it’s donation. Other criticising countries simply remain silent about increasing their donation.
It should be kept in mind that President Trump has not made any critical observation about the past contribution of W H O to the cause of world health nor has he questioned the need and relevance of W H O.
President Trump’s objection is to the partiality of present leadership of W H O in favour of China. He has further said that the American tax payers’ money cannot be spent for an organisaiton in whose credibility USA has developed doubts. This view is understandable.
It is hoped that the withdrawal of donation by USA would force UNO / W H O to have a relook at the functioning style and mend it’s ways. Instead of accusing the US President of politicalizing the issue , Director General of W H O should have the wisdom to send the top office bearers of W H O to USA and explain what W H O has done and what it has not done with facts and figures.
The withdrawal of donation of President Trump to W H O would serve it’s purpose, if it would bring a quality change in the leadership of W H O with the present Director General and top team of officials to come forward and own responsibility and quit the job.
The world community want W H O to function efficiently and competently. But, what is the use of W H O , if it’s leadership would be an object of suspicion and criticism.
USA has made significant contribution to W H O in the past more than any other country and world community should be grateful to USA for this. Certainly, U S A would certainly resume it’s donation to W H O, if and when leadership of W H O would mend it’s ways.
Post a Comment