In a decision that marks the most dramatic contraction of American diplomatic engagement since the isolationist era of the 1930s, the United States has formally initiated its withdrawal from 66 international bodies. The move, codified in a presidential memorandum signed on January 7, 2026, targets a vast array of United Nations and non-UN entities focused on climate change, social policy, migration, and development.

For the corridors of power in Islamabad, Brussels, and Beijing, the announcement was not unexpected, yet the sheer scale of the exodus has sent tremors through the edifice of global diplomacy. The White House has framed this mass withdrawal as a necessary corrective to “globalist overreach,” asserting that these organizations no longer serve the national interest. However, for the international community—and particularly for nations in the Global South that rely on the multilateral framework for stability and development aid—the move is being viewed as the dismantling of the very rules-based order Washington helped construct eight decades ago.

The scope of the withdrawal is breathtaking. Among the casualties are the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)—the bedrock of global climate negotiations—the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), UN Women, and the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). The administration’s fact sheet, released shortly after the signing, described these bodies as “wasteful,” “mismanaged,” and vehicles for “radical policies” that undermine US sovereignty.

This is not merely a budgetary trimming; it is an ideological purge. The administration has resurrected the “America First” doctrine with a vengeance, pivoting away from the slow, deliberative consensus of multilateralism toward a transactional bilateralism. While the White House argues this will save taxpayer dollars and unshackle the US economy, critics warn that Washington is effectively ceding the field, leaving a vacuum that will inevitably lead to a more fragmented and volatile world.

The Climate Guillotine

Perhaps the most visceral shock has been reserved for the global environmental architecture. By exiting the UNFCCC and the IPCC, the US has effectively walked away from the negotiating table on the planetary climate crisis. This goes further than previous withdrawals from the Paris Agreement; it is a rejection of the scientific consensus and the diplomatic mechanism used to address it.

For countries like Pakistan, which sits on the frontlines of climate vulnerability despite contributing negligible emissions, this decision feels like an abandonment. The UNFCCC has historically been the primary forum where developing nations could demand accountability and finance from the industrialised North. Without the United States—historically the largest cumulative emitter—at the table, the pressure mechanism for climate finance risks collapse. The promise of the Loss and Damage Fund, hard-won at COP27, now hangs by a thread, as the largest potential contributor exits the building.

The White House rationale is stark. The administration claims that these bodies promote “radical climate policies” that stifle American economic might. The memorandum specifically targets the International Solar Alliance and the International Renewable Energy Agency, signaling a complete pivot back to fossil fuel primacy. This “drill, baby, drill” approach, now codified into foreign policy, places the US on a collision course with a world that is largely moving toward decarbonisation.

The withdrawal from the IPCC is particularly damaging. As the premier scientific body assessing climate change, the IPCC relies on global data and consensus. A US exit undermines the scientific imprimatur of its reports, potentially emboldening climate skepticism globally. It sends a message that scientific reality is now subject to political ratification. For the Global South, where climate adaptation is a matter of survival, the US departure is not just an isolationist policy; it is an abdication of moral responsibility.

Eroding the Social Compact

Beyond the climate sphere, the guillotine has fallen on organizations critical to social development and human rights. The withdrawal from UN Women and various migration bodies signals a retreat from the “soft power” advocacy that has long characterized Western diplomacy. The administration has labeled these entities as vehicles for “woke” ideology, a domestic political pejorative now weaponized on the international stage.

The cutting of ties with UNRWA is a final blow to an agency already under siege. For decades, UNRWA has provided essential services to Palestinian refugees. Its defunding by the US is likely to precipitate a humanitarian catastrophe, further destabilising the Middle East. It reflects a broader pattern where humanitarian aid is no longer viewed as a universal good, but as a lever of political coercion. The repercussions will be felt not just in Gaza and the West Bank, but in the refugee camps of Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, creating new waves of instability that will ripple outward.

Furthermore, the exit from the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance suggests that Washington is no longer interested in the pretence of promoting democratic values abroad. This aligns with a foreign policy that seems increasingly comfortable with autocracy, provided it aligns with short-term US economic interests. The “city on a hill” is closing its gates.

This retreat impacts the intricate web of global cooperation that manages everything from telecommunications standards to pandemic response. By labeling these organizations as “inefficient,” the US ignores the reality that multilateralism is inherently messy because it requires consensus among diverse nations. By rejecting the process, Washington is rejecting the very concept of a shared global destiny.

A Multipolar Reality

The geopolitical implications of this “Great Withdrawal” will be profound. Nature, as the adage goes, abhors a vacuum. The retreat of the United States does not mean these international organizations will cease to exist; rather, their center of gravity will shift.

It is a miscalculation to assume that the world will simply wait for America to return. Other powers are poised to step in. The European Union will likely attempt to hold the fort on climate and human rights, but it lacks the singular heft to replace the US entirely. This opens the door for emerging economies and established powers in the East to play a more decisive role.

China, in particular, finds itself in a unique position. Without engaging in aggressive rhetoric, Beijing has consistently signaled its commitment to the UN framework and global connectivity. As Washington retreats, the Belt and Road Initiative and other non-Western forums may naturally gain greater traction as reliable vehicles for development and cooperation. For nations in Africa and Asia, the partner that shows up is the partner that matters. If the US is absent, the Global South will look elsewhere for technology, infrastructure, and diplomatic support. This is not about anti-Americanism; it is about pragmatism.

For the diplomat in Islamabad, the calculation has irrevocably changed. The US can no longer be relied upon as a steady partner in global governance. Alliances will become more fluid; regional blocs—such as SCO or ASEAN—will gain prominence over global ones. We may see the strengthening of alternative forums that operate without the Western imprimatur.

Ultimately, this move may harm the United States more than the institutions it seeks to punish. By self-isolating, Washington loses its ability to shape the rules of the road for the 21st century. It is retreating into a fortress of its own making, leaving the rest of the world to chart a course through the turbulent waters of the coming decades. The “liberal international order,” flawed as it was, is fading. What replaces it remains to be seen, but one thing is certain: the era of American indispensability is officially over.

About the Author: The author is associated with the Global Strategic Institute for Sustainable Development – GSISD and can be reached at waniatahir23@gmail.com