Italy’s political landscape faces fresh turbulence as the far-right League party launches a bold legislative push to withdraw from the World Health Organization. Following President Donald Trump’s footsteps, the proposal marks another significant alignment between European far-right movements and recent American policy shifts.
On Thursday, League Senator Claudio Borghi formally introduced a bill calling for Italy’s complete exit from the WHO, arguing the organization had accumulated “excess power” and that Italy’s financial contributions could be better directed toward domestic healthcare needs. The announcement comes just days after Trump signed an executive order pulling the United States out of the global health body.
The League party, led by Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, is a junior partner in Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s right-wing coalition government. While Meloni maintains close ties with Trump—she was the only European Union leader to attend his inauguration—her office has not yet taken a position on the League’s WHO withdrawal proposal, leaving questions about potential coalition tensions.
The Proposal and Its Supporters
Matteo Salvini, leader of Italy’s far-right League Party and the country’s Deputy Prime Minister, introduced the bill to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO) with the goal of reclaiming Italy’s sovereignty over its healthcare system. According to Salvini, Italy should no longer be bound by the decisions of a “supranational power center,” especially one that is, in his view, heavily financed by Italian taxpayers. He criticized the WHO for its alleged ties to multinational pharmaceutical companies, positioning the organization as a major financial burden without offering tangible benefits to Italy.
Salvini’s rhetoric resonates with a growing faction within Italy’s political landscape that is increasingly skeptical of international organizations. His proposal advocates for redirecting the substantial financial contributions that Italy makes to the WHO—approximately €66 million in the 2024-2025 funding period—toward strengthening Italy’s own healthcare system. By investing this money into local hospitals and supporting Italian doctors, Salvini argues, Italy can better meet the needs of its citizens. This populist argument has gained traction among his political allies, who share his belief that national resources should prioritize domestic concerns over global commitments.
While the League Party’s proposal has strong backing from Salvini’s supporters, it also signals a broader ideological alignment with populist movements worldwide. Salvini’s stance draws a clear parallel to Trump’s own decision to withdraw the U.S. from the WHO, positioning both leaders as advocates for national sovereignty in the face of perceived global overreach.
The Global Context: Trump’s Influence
Salvini’s proposal to withdraw from the WHO is directly influenced by former U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order in 2020, which marked the U.S.’s formal exit from the organization. Trump’s move was rooted in his administration’s criticism of the WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and its perceived bias toward China. For Trump, the WHO’s response to the global health crisis represented a failure to act swiftly and decisively, especially as the pandemic spread from Wuhan to the rest of the world. He argued that the organization had not taken sufficient action to address what he described as China’s mishandling of the outbreak, and he criticized its leadership for not instituting necessary reforms.
Trump’s withdrawal also stemmed from broader grievances about the financial contributions of member states, particularly the U.S., which historically contributed the largest share of funding to the WHO. At the time, Trump called the U.S. contribution “unfair” given the comparatively small financial commitments of other large countries, including China. By withdrawing, Trump aimed to force the WHO into making reforms and also reduce the U.S.’s financial burden. His decision left a significant gap in the WHO’s funding structure, contributing to the financial strain the organization has faced in recent years.
Salvini’s alignment with Trump is evident in both the rhetoric and the political context of their respective proposals. For Salvini, following Trump’s lead represents a challenge to international bodies he believes are overreaching and undermining national sovereignty. Like Trump, Salvini sees the WHO as a source of financial and political influence that doesn’t serve Italy’s best interests. The political symbolism of Italy potentially following the U.S. out of the WHO signals a growing trend of nationalist policies that reject internationalism in favor of local autonomy, particularly in the realm of health governance.
Italy’s Current Political Climate
While Salvini’s proposal has captured attention, Italy’s Prime Minister, Giorgia Meloni, has yet to publicly comment on the bill. Meloni, who leads a right-wing government and is a known ally of Trump, has kept her stance on the WHO withdrawal unclear. This has left room for speculation about whether Meloni will support Salvini’s push or if the issue could drive a wedge between the two prominent figures in Italy’s political landscape.
The political dynamics within Italy are complex. Salvini’s League Party is a key coalition partner in Meloni’s government, and their alliance has helped consolidate right-wing power in the country. However, Meloni’s own approach to international relations may differ from Salvini’s more populist and isolationist stance. While she has supported some of Trump’s policies, including skepticism toward international organizations, her public silence on the WHO withdrawal could indicate that she is weighing the potential diplomatic fallout of such a move.
Opposition parties within Italy have already voiced strong opposition to the proposal, calling it “dangerous” and “irresponsible.” Critics argue that pulling out of the WHO would isolate Italy on the global stage, weakening its influence in international health matters. They warn that such a decision could have significant diplomatic and financial consequences, especially as Italy faces ongoing challenges with healthcare reform and the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Legal and Logistical Considerations of the WHO Withdrawal
Salvini’s proposal to withdraw from the WHO faces significant legal challenges. The WHO’s constitution does not include a formal withdrawal clause, meaning any country wishing to exit would need to navigate complex international law. While the U.S. under Trump effectively placed itself in an “inactive status,” Italy would likely face a drawn-out process. According to international law, countries must provide a year’s notice if they wish to withdraw from treaties without exit clauses, a stipulation under the Vienna Convention of 1969.
Additionally, Italy would lose its voting rights at the World Health Assembly and forfeit its participation in crucial global health projects. This would reduce Italy’s ability to influence international health policy, limiting its access to resources and information, especially in times of health emergencies. The repercussions for Italy’s domestic healthcare system could be substantial, given the WHO’s role in coordinating global responses to pandemics.
The complexity of withdrawal underscores the risks and challenges Italy would face if it chooses to sever ties with the WHO, raising questions about the long-term consequences for its global standing and public health strategy.
What the World Thinks of Italy’s WHO Withdrawal Proposal
The proposal for Italy to leave the WHO has sparked reactions both domestically and internationally. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has expressed concern about the broader implications of any potential exit, warning that it could disrupt global health cooperation and undermine collective efforts to tackle health crises. The organization’s financial stability could also be further strained, given that Italy, along with other member states, plays a critical role in its funding structure.
In addition, European leaders have voiced opposition to the idea. German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach criticized the U.S. decision to withdraw from the WHO and expressed his hope that Italy would reconsider. He argued that such moves could “seriously harm the international fight against global health crises.” Similarly, former EU health commissioner Stella Kyriakides emphasized that distancing oneself from the WHO could have grave consequences for global health, particularly for countries that rely on international cooperation to address emerging health threats.
These criticisms highlight the broader concern that withdrawing from the WHO would isolate Italy and weaken its role in addressing global health issues, potentially undermining the country’s ability to effectively manage public health in an increasingly interconnected world.
What’s Next for the Nation and Global Health?
Matteo Salvini’s proposal to withdraw Italy from the World Health Organization has sparked a heated debate, raising crucial questions about the future of international health cooperation. While the proposal reflects a broader wave of nationalism and skepticism toward global institutions, it also underscores the complexities of balancing national sovereignty with the collective efforts needed to tackle global health crises. The potential withdrawal could isolate Italy from vital global health initiatives and weaken its role in addressing issues like pandemics and disease prevention.
As the situation continues to unfold, the decision will likely shape not only Italy’s future relationship with the WHO but also its broader stance on international cooperation. The world will be watching to see whether Italy chooses a path of isolation or reaffirms its commitment to global health collaboration, recognizing that many of today’s health challenges are too vast and interconnected for any one country to tackle alone.
