Question of UN's survival more valid than ever in new Trump term: Analyst

The whirlwind early days of US President Donald Trump’s second term have clearly shown how his administration’s shift away from multilateralism is set to challenge the future of global governance, Anadolu Agency reports.

Trump’s “America First” agenda has already led to the US withdrawing from the UN Human Rights body, the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Paris Agreement. With his administration now pausing all foreign aid programs, further exits from UN agencies could be on the horizon.

According to Swiss-American political analyst, Daniel Warner, there will be “a general movement against multilateralism” under Trump, so the question about the survival of the UN has become a “very valid one”.

“There’s a certain animosity in the US towards the UN and multilateralism,” he said in an interview with Anadolu.

“Most Americans who voted for him (Trump) believe that the US should only be concerned with its national interest.”

READ: UN investigator says Trump’s plan to ‘relocate’ Gazans amounts to ‘ethnic cleansing’

Even the candidate for US ambassador to the UN, Elise Stefanik, is “very anti-UN”, an indicator of the Trump administration’s anti-multilateral stance.

“I would not be surprised if … there may be other things the US will withdraw from or diminish its participation in,” he said, adding that without American participation, the UN risks losing its legitimacy and influence.

Adapt or decline

Warner emphasized that the UN now faces a clear choice – adapt or decline – and must look beyond Washington for support, if it is to remain relevant.

The US currently contributes approximately 23 per cent of the UN’s overall budget, he said, which makes it a key financial benefactor.

“The UN has been dependent on the United States financially, so maybe it’s time for other countries or the EU to start paying more,” he said.

Warner argued that the organisation must “rebrand” itself and move beyond its traditional focus on human rights and humanitarian law.

Instead, it should address emerging global issues such as technological advancements and climate change, he said.

However, he questioned whether countries that may step in to fill the void, such as China, Turkiye or Middle Eastern nations, would be truly willing to take over Washington’s burden.

Warner also criticised the UN’s failure to resolve pressing conflicts, highlighting its shortcomings in securing peace.

“The UN has not been successful in securing global peace and security. The war in the Middle East continues, the war between Russia and Ukraine (as well) … The UN loses some of its authority and legitimacy by not being stronger in guaranteeing global peace and security,” he said.

A League of Nations moment?

Drawing historical parallels, Warner compared the current state of the UN to the League of Nations, which ultimately collapsed due to a lack of American participation.

“The question is can the UN continue without American leadership? “There may be some work in specialised agencies, but the overall organisation is seriously in decline,” he said.

“The question about its survival is a very valid one.”

Warner lamented what he views as a lack of strong leadership in the UN, noting that past figures played a more prominent role in defending multilateralism compared to current UN chief, Antonio Guterres.

“There are no outstanding figures today who defend multilateralism. With all due respect to Antonio Guterres, the Secretary-General, I think that’s a danger. They have to find a solution, either by rebranding or finding other people,” he said.

READ: UN Rapporteurs condemn Trump’s sanctions against ICC