If you’ve been scrolling through your feed lately, you’ve probably seen the headlines about the U.S. and the United Nations. Honestly, it’s a bit of a whirlwind. On January 7, 2026, the Trump administration dropped a massive memorandum that basically serves as a "divorce papers" list for dozens of international groups. We aren't just talking about a few small committees here; the U.S. is pulling out of 66 international organizations.
That number is huge. It includes 31 entities that are directly part of the UN system.
People are freaking out, and for good reason. For decades, the U.S. has been the "big brother" of the United Nations, providing the most cash and the most influence. Now? The "America First" policy is taking a sledgehammer to that foundation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio—who is wearing about four different hats in this administration—put it bluntly: he said it's no longer acceptable to spend American "blood, sweat, and treasure" on institutions that don't give us anything back.
But what does this actually mean for you, or for the world? Is the UN just going to collapse? Not exactly. But it’s going to look a lot different by the time this year is over.
The Great 2026 Exit: Which UN Groups Are Gone?
Most people hear "Trump United Nations news" and think the U.S. is leaving the UN entirely. That hasn't happened—at least not yet. We still have a seat on the Security Council, which is where the real power (and the veto) lives. However, the list of organizations the U.S. is ditching is incredibly specific and hits on some very sensitive nerves.
The Climate "Nail in the Coffin"
The biggest shocker for the scientific community was the withdrawal from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
✨ Don't miss: Ukraine War Map May 2025: Why the Frontlines Aren't Moving Like You Think
Now, Trump already pulled the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement (again) right when he took office in 2025. But leaving the UNFCCC is a whole other level. It's the bedrock treaty from 1992 that every other climate deal is built on. By walking away, the U.S. is basically saying it doesn't even want to be in the room when climate rules are discussed.
Social and Humanitarian Cuts
The administration is also cutting ties with:
- UN Women: The group focused on gender equality.
- UN Population Fund (UNFPA): This is the agency that handles family planning and maternal health in over 150 countries.
- UN Human Rights Council: This one isn't a surprise, as the administration has long argued that the council protects human rights abusers while unfairly targeting allies like Israel.
The Economic Commissions
This part is kinda dry but actually really important for global trade. The U.S. is leaving regional economic commissions for Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, and Western Asia. These are the groups that help set the "rules of the road" for business and development in those regions.
Why Mike Waltz is the Man in the Hot Seat
While the administration is pulling out of 66 groups, they still need someone to handle the stuff they are staying in. That person is Mike Waltz.
It took forever to get him confirmed. Like, eight months of delays. He finally got the green light from the Senate in September 2025 with a 47-43 vote. Waltz is a former Green Beret and National Security Adviser, and he’s basically been told to go to New York and demand "major reform."
🔗 Read more: Percentage of Women That Voted for Trump: What Really Happened
He’s in a weird spot. On one hand, he told the Senate that the UN has "drifted from its core mission of peacemaking." On the other hand, he’s argued that the U.S. must stay at the table to counter China.
Think about it: if the U.S. leaves a seat empty, who sits in it? Usually, it's China. Waltz knows this, and it’s why he’s trying to balance the "get out" energy of the White House with the "stay and fight" reality of global politics.
The Money Problem: Where Did the Billions Go?
Let’s talk about the "taxpayer dollars" everyone keeps mentioning. The U.S. has historically paid about 22% of the UN's regular budget.
Last year, the U.S. just... stopped paying its 2024 dues.
This has created a massive cash crunch in New York. While the administration did drop about $2 billion into global humanitarian assistance through the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) recently, that’s "voluntary" money. It's money the U.S. chooses to give to specific projects, like feeding refugees, rather than "assessed" money that the UN can use however it wants.
💡 You might also like: What Category Was Harvey? The Surprising Truth Behind the Number
The strategy is clear: If we can't control it, we won't fund it. ### What stays?
Interestingly, the administration hasn't touched the World Food Programme (WFP) or the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in the same way. Why? Because they serve immediate security and humanitarian functions that even this White House sees as "essential." If a famine breaks out and millions of people start moving toward borders, that becomes a security issue the U.S. can't ignore.
What Most People Get Wrong About the UN News
A lot of the "Trump United Nations news" you see on social media makes it sound like the UN is a world government that Trump is finally defeating. Or, on the flip side, that he's destroying world peace.
The reality is way more complicated (and honestly, a bit more bureaucratic).
- Sovereignty vs. Cooperation: The White House argues that these 66 organizations promote "globalist agendas" that override U.S. law. For example, they hated the Global Forum on Migration and Development because they felt it told the U.S. how to handle its own borders.
- The "Vacuum" Effect: Experts like Brian Greenhill from the University at Albany are worried about what happens when we leave. If the U.S. isn't in the International Cotton Advisory Committee (yes, that’s a real thing we’re leaving), then American farmers lose their voice in setting global cotton standards.
- Legal Challenges: You can't always just "quit" a treaty that the Senate ratified. Expect a lot of lawsuits in 2026. The administration’s authority to unilaterally walk away from something like the UNFCCC is going to be tested in court.
The Actionable Reality: What Should You Watch For?
If you’re trying to keep up with this, don't just look for the word "withdrawal." Look for the implementation.
- Watch the Security Council: As long as the U.S. keeps its veto power, we are still the most powerful player in the room. If Trump ever suggests leaving the Security Council, that is the "end of the world" scenario for the UN.
- Monitor the Budget: Keep an eye on the "FY26 SFOPS Bill." That’s the boring legislative name for the money that actually funds our remaining UN presence. If Congress slashes that, even Mike Waltz won't have the tools to do his job.
- Look at Regional Power: Since the U.S. is leaving regional economic commissions, watch how China and the EU move into those spaces. They’ll likely start signing trade and development deals that exclude American interests.
The bottom line? The U.S. is moving from a "leader of everything" role to a "picky participant" role. It's a massive gamble on American sovereignty that will either save billions or cost us our seat at the head of the table.
Your Next Steps:
- Check your news sources: Ensure you're looking at specific agency names (like UNFCCC vs. the UN as a whole) to understand the scale of the "Trump United Nations news" updates.
- Follow the money: Keep tabs on whether the U.S. begins to pay its back-dues or if the "assessed contributions" continue to be withheld, which will signal the level of future engagement.
- Review the list of 66 organizations: If you are in an industry like agriculture or energy, see if any of the technical bodies the U.S. is leaving (like the International Energy Forum) impact your specific field's global standards.