Full List: 66 UN and international bodies the US has exited from under Trump

President Donald Trump has formally withdrawn the United States from 66 international organisations and agreements, signalling the most significant rollback of American multilateralism in modern history and a fundamental shift toward an "America First" foreign policy.

The decision, finalised on January 7, 2026, follows a comprehensive 180-day review initiated by the Trump administration shortly after returning to office in early 2025. 

This review was mandated to assess whether U.S. participation in intergovernmental organisations, conventions, and treaties served the national interest. 

The resulting list of 66 entities, comprising 31 United Nations-linked bodies and 35 independent international organisations, represents a sweeping retreat from global governance frameworks that have defined U.S. diplomacy for decades. 

The White House justified the mass withdrawal by labelling these institutions as "redundant," "wasteful," or "contrary to U.S. sovereignty and economic prosperity."

The withdrawals are heavily concentrated in several key sectors, most notably climate change and environment. 

By exiting the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United States has become the first nation to abandon the bedrock scientific and legal frameworks governing global climate negotiations. 

This move effectively severs the U.S. from the parent agreement of the 2015 Paris Accord. 

Beyond the environment, the administration has targeted social and human rights entities, including UN Women and the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), citing ideological differences regarding gender policy and reproductive health. 

Economic and trade-focused bodies such as the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the International Trade Centre (ITC) were also identified for exit, as part of a broader effort to prioritise bilateral trade arrangements over multilateral forums.

The international community has responded with a mixture of alarm and tactical repositioning. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres described the move as a blow to the "multilateral, rules-based system," while European and Asian allies have expressed concern over the "leadership vacuum" being created. 

Analysts warn that the retreat provides a strategic opening for China and other rivals to expand their influence within these organisations. 

Representative Gregory Meeks, Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, criticised the move as a "self-inflicted wound" that diminishes American leverage and robs the U.S. of its voice in designing the rules of the global digital economy and counterterrorism strategies.

The practical consequences are immediate and far-reaching. The U.S. has historically been the largest financial contributor to many of these organisations; its departure leaves significant funding gaps that could force the closure of programs ranging from renewable energy development to anti-piracy operations in Asia. 

Legally, the withdrawal from the UNFCCC is expected to face challenges in U.S. courts, as legal scholars debate whether an executive order can unilaterally terminate a treaty that was originally ratified by a two-thirds vote in the Senate. 

Regardless of the legal outcome, the administration has directed all executive departments to cease funding and participation "to the extent permitted by law," effectively paralysing U.S. involvement in the interim.