'A Nefarious Organisation:' Argentina Joins US in Leaving WHO Amid Health Controversies

Argentina has officially severed all ties with the World Health Organisation (WHO), following through on a 2025 pledge by President Javier Milei to reclaim 'national health sovereignty' from what he brands a 'nefarious' globalist entity.

The withdrawal became legally effective on Tuesday, 17 March 2026, exactly one year after the Milei administration issued its formal notification to the United Nations. The move mirrors the United States' exit, which was completed in January 2026 under President Donald Trump.

Argentine Foreign Minister Pablo Quirno confirmed the exit, stating that the nation will no longer be bound by 'supranational impositions' and will instead pivot toward a decentralised model of bilateral and regional health agreements.

The dual departure of two of the Western Hemisphere's largest economies represents the most significant challenge to the WHO since its 1948 inception. Milei has repeatedly cited the COVID-19 lockdowns, which he calls the 'greatest experiment in social control in history', as the primary catalyst for the break, accusing the Geneva-based agency of prioritising political interests over rigorous science.

The Milei-Trump Alliance: A New Health Bloc

The synchronised exit of Washington and Buenos Aires signals a burgeoning 'sovereignty-first' bloc that rejects the WHO's advisory mandate. While the WHO maintains it is merely an advisory body with no power to impose laws, both Milei and Trump argue that its 'recommendations' acted as de facto directives that led to devastating economic and social consequences.

President Milei's administration has been vocal about his desire to build a 'Latin American Health Shield' that relies on regional cooperation rather than a centralised global authority. This new approach aims to provide 'greater flexibility' and more 'customised' responses to local health crises, free from the bureaucratic lag associated with the UN.

Milei called the WHO a 'nefarious organisation' in recent speeches. His words also reflect the broader scepticism towards the world, particularly among right-wing leaders, who tend to view international bodies as a threat to national sovereignty.

The WHO Response: 'The World Is Less Safe'

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has issued a detailed rebuttal to the withdrawals, describing the decisions as 'shortsighted and misguided.' He warned that the absence of US and Argentine funding and data-sharing will create a 'dangerous void' in global disease surveillance, particularly in tracking new influenza strains and the ongoing effort to eradicate polio.

Tedros strongly denied allegations of 'social control,' noting that the WHO never recommended mandates or lockdowns, but rather provided evidence-based guidance for sovereign nations to adapt. 'Withdrawal makes both the United States and the rest of the world unsafe,' he stated during a press briefing in Geneva. Despite the exit, the WHO has left the 'door open' for future re-engagement, even as the US remains embroiled in a dispute over $278 million (£219 million) in unpaid membership dues from 2024 and 2025.

The '66 Organisations' Context

Argentina's exit is seen as a key victory for the Trump administration's broader 'Global Withdrawal' strategy. As of March 2026, the White House has initiated or completed withdrawals from 66 international bodies and treaties, including:

• The UNFCCC (Paris Climate Agreement): US exit finalised 27 January 2026.
• UNESCO: Continued suspension of funding and participation.
• UN Population Fund (UNFPA): Withdrawal cited as a move toward 'pro-life' international policy.

For Milei, joining this 'Great Exit' is a calculated political move to align Argentina with the 'America First' agenda, which his supporters believe will unlock preferential trade deals and security cooperation with Washington.

Future Outlook: Regional vs Global

With Argentina now officially a non-member, the focus shifts to whether other right-leaning governments in the region, such as those in El Salvador or Paraguay, will follow suit. Critics of the move, including the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), warn that the loss of 'disease intelligence' could mean the US and Argentina are 'at the back of the line' when the next pandemic occurs.

However, the Milei administration remains undeterred. Minister Quirno emphasised that Argentina is 'not retreating into isolation' but is instead 'safeguarding its capacity to make decisions regarding health policies.'