Expert: Moldova Risks Being Affected by Upcoming Changes Following US Withdrawal from WHO

Anton SHVEC US withdrawal from the World Health Organization confirmed that the entire system of international organizations is indeed undergoing crisis and called into question its further functioning. Being a consumer country of international assistance, Moldova can be largely affected by the emerging transformations On July 6, 2020, the United States withdrew from the World Health Organization. Donald Trump’s political decision is obviously irreversible. To finalize the withdrawal from WHO, Washington has to settle the formalities with paying out membership fees arrears amounting to $ 200 million. This move is impressive, despite the fact that the US-WHO “break-up” has long been announced and repeatedly substantiated by President Trump in public. Certainly, the United States, with over 25% of global COVID-19 cases, has every reason to criticize the WHO, which appeared to be clumsy and bureaucratic in its response to the coronavirus outbreak. In terms of home policy, the 45th US president could not ignore 133 thousand deaths (of which almost 50 thousand are in New York and New Jersey, which Donald Trump personally sympathetic to). However, the decisiveness and brutality of the US reaction suggests the current Washington decision-makers are deeply dissatisfied with global institutions. Refusal to provide funding and the US withdrawal from WHO are also a signal to other international institutions. This immediately brings to mind an extremely tough and tense period of relations between Washington and the International Monetary Fund, which in 2007-2011 was led by the French socialist politician Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who lost his post under very strange and piquant circumstances. Today, the World Trade Organization more and more often appears under the fire of Donald Trump’s sharp criticism. The WTO is considered to traditionally act as a tool to ensure the economic dominance of the “powers that be,” including the United States. However, the People’s Republic of China, which was classified by the WTO as a developing country, could make the best out of it by increasing production, exports and living standards. Despite the inter-penetration and -dependence of US and PRC economies to the extent of the notorious “Chimerica”, Beijing still enjoys all the advantages of a developing economy status. Such a setup contradicts the Make America Great Again global vision and forces Washington to act with minimal regard for WTO rules. For example, US protectionist duties on steel and aluminum, including from the European Union, is a direct violation of the organization’s norms. It is also worth mentioning the trade wars with China, conflicts with Mexico, the cross-border sanctions against Iran, North Korea, Russia, China, Cuba, and even disrespect for the OPEC+ deal potential. Today we can confidently talk about the new isolationism of the United States and its readiness to defend its national interests without excessive reverence for the outdated international institutions. The US chooses bilateral and multilateral tactical alliances over clumsy international institutions, which lose their leading role and legitimacy day after day. It got to the point that Washington is rocking the foundations of the NATO military alliance, which has always been perceived as an instrument of American foreign and military policy. Until recently, a drastic reduction in the US troops number in Germany could seem a clumsy joke. Today, the obvious “punishment” of Berlin for refusing to spend 2% of GDP on military needs is becoming part of political reality. Meanwhile, Washington has been for decades and still remains the main donor of the vast majority of such universal organizations. The US membership contributions ensured endless overstaffing of these organizations and increasing number of ongoing projects and field presence, including in Moldova. Being funded, these organizations reinforced their standing and broadcast Washington’s stance across the globe. Today, however, the United States, obviously, no longer wants to pay, assessing the benefits from the existence of such organizations as insufficient and sometimes simply fictitious. The Republic of Moldova has been a consumer of international assistance throughout the entire period of its independent existence. The UN family structures, the IMF, the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, as well as numerous governmental agencies and non-governmental funds – all as one are Moldova’s donors. If such organizations weaken and their support is revised, it will be extremely dangerous for Moldova, which is absolutely not ready today to “get off the donor needle”. Moreover, the contemporary international law experiences not only an institutional crisis: its fundamental principles, including the non-use of force and the territorial integrity of states, have been undermined. Today, the international law as a whole favors Moldova’s efforts to reintegrate Transdniestria; however, if institutions collapse, its principles might be revised. As a result, Moldova will have to learn not only to keep within its means, without reliance on the dwindling international funding, but also to independently build a sound domestic and foreign policy.