Trump's "America First" Policy Sparks International Concern as US Withdraws from Global Organisations
Johannesburg – The United States' decision to withdraw from 66 international organisations has ignited a debate over the future of multilateralism and the role of the US in global affairs. Political analyst Professor Theo Neethling describes the move as a clear political signal that the Trump administration prioritises the country’s personal interests above international rules and institutions.
This shift, according to Neethling, represents a move away from multilateralism and towards a unilateral projection of power under President Donald Trump. The withdrawal follows Trump's announcement that his administration is prioritising "America First" interests, leading to the US disengaging from numerous international bodies.
The organisations affected span a wide range of sectors, including key climate treaties, health bodies, and a UN entity promoting gender equality and women’s empowerment. The Trump administration argues that these organisations operate contrary to US national interests.
The impact of this decision is expected to be far-reaching, affecting nations across Latin America, Europe, Asia, and Africa, as the withdrawals include both United Nations (UN) and non-UN commissions.
Several organisations directly impacting Africa are included in the withdrawal, such as the Office of the Special Advisor on Africa, the UN Economic Commission for Africa, and the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent.
This decision stems from a review ordered by Trump in February 2025, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio tasked with identifying US commitments deemed "wasteful, ineffective, and harmful" to American interests.
Neethling views this as a direct act of leverage in world politics. "This means the US is strategically aiming to influence other nations’ policies and actions through economic, military and institutional power, by exploiting vulnerabilities and controlling critical resources such as trade routes, financial systems, or essential goods, exemplified by sanctions, aid, or controlling key network hubs to achieve specific political and economic goals."
The consequences for international politics, according to Neethling, are profound. "Multilateral institutions will be further weakened, and not only financially. And remember the US is already in serious financial trouble, but international organisations will be further financially troubled," he said. He added that the international rules established after World War II would be eroded even further.
International relations expert Professor John Stremlau describes Trump as someone who believes in a world where those with superior power, whether through physical strength, military force, or wealth, has the authority to determine what is moral, just, or legal. "And that is certainly not the way to go for the future," he cautioned.
Political analyst and governance expert Sandile Swana argues that the US seeks the freedom to act outside international norms, effectively wanting to decide what becomes right and lawful for themselves, regardless of other nations. "They don’t want constraints on their sovereignty. They don’t want equity and equality, and they don’t want diversity and equality among nations," Swana stated. He emphasised that the idea of multilateralism, the global order, and the UN must be championed by other nations, including the European Union, the African Union, and Latin American states.
The Trump administration's actions are not isolated. In 2025, the administration enacted sweeping cuts to global health funding, specifically targeting Africa and South Africa. These actions included the freezing and subsequent permanent cancellation of billions in foreign assistance, the dismantling of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), and significant reductions to the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).
Further highlighting the shift in US foreign policy, the US skipped the annual UN international climate summit last year for the first time in three decades.
The US also refused to sign the final joint declaration of the G20 summit held in South Africa, due to the inclusion of climate change commitments and long-standing diplomatic tensions with South Africa. The Trump administration rejected the declaration’s language regarding the “severity of climate change”, support for renewable energy, and the Paris Agreement.
Follow Us on Twitter
