Options for Africa on U.S. Withdrawal from UN Agencies

• As U.S. withdrawal from UN agencies hits, millions in Africa face heightened risks of hunger, disease, and instability—can the continent pivot to self-reliance?
• From climate finance to peacekeeping, Trump’s mass exit from global bodies leaves Africa searching for new partners in a rapidly shifting international order.
• Trump’s retreat from multilateralism is bound to test Africa’s resilience and geopolitical leverage like never before.

In the latest powerful assertion of “America First” policy, President Donald Trump’s January 8, 2026, memorandum has directed the United States to withdraw from 31 United Nations entities and 35 non-UN international organisations, citing their promotion of “radical climate policies, global governance, and ideological programmes,” initiatives that undermine U.S. sovereignty.

This move, effective immediately where legally feasible, halts U.S. participation and funding, reshaping global aid dynamics. For Africa, a continent that is heavily reliant on multilateral support, the U.S. withdrawal from UN agencies threatens billions in financing, disrupts skills transfer initiatives, and accelerates a shake-up in the international order. Yet, amid the turmoil, opportunities could start taking shape for African-led resilience and investment diversification globally.

As the news on U.S. withdrawal from UN agencies reverberates across the world, authorities of the New York-headquartered agency maintain that its operations and planned contributions from member states is set to remain on course.

On Thursday, the UN Secretary General António Guterres stated that “all United Nations entities will go on with the implementation of their mandates as given by Member States. The United Nations has a responsibility to deliver for those who depend on us. We will continue to carry out our mandates with determination.”

Under the UN Charter, financing for the global body’s regular and peacekeeping operations are approved by the General Assembly and are considered binding undertakings. This year, the General Assembly approved $3.45 billion regular budget, a decrease from 2025. What’s more, the UN is experiencing a 15 per cent dip in financial resources this year plus a 19 per cent shedding in staff numbers.

The Scope of U.S. Withdrawal from UN Agencies

The memorandum encompasses high-profile exits, including the exit from Nairobi-headquartered UN Habitat, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the World Health Organisation (WHO), and UNESCO, alongside bodies like the International Solar Alliance.

This builds on Trump’s first-term pullouts, such as from the Paris Agreement and WHO, but escalates to a broader disengagement from 66 entities in total. The White House frames it as ending “taxpayer funding for globalist agendas,” but critics argue it cedes U.S. influence, allowing rivals such as China to fill voids.

Africa’s Stake in These Affected Bodies

Africa receives substantial U.S. contributions via these organisations, with statistics estimating over $3.38 billion in UN humanitarian aid alone in 2025, representing 14.6 per cent of global totals. Entities such as WHO support health programmes in Ebola-hit regions, while the UNFPA aids reproductive health in high-fertility nations. The withdrawals signal a pivot from multilateralism, forcing Africa to navigate reduced resources amid ongoing crises.

The Africa funding implications are profound: U.S. dues fund 22 per cent of the UN’s regular budget and 25 per cent of peacekeeping, much of which operates in Africa such as missions in South Sudan and Somalia.

A $2 billion U.S. pledge for UN humanitarian efforts in late last year, targeting 17 crisis-hit countries, many African now hangs in balance, with warnings to “adapt or die.” In Somalia, where U.S. aid suspension followed warehouse destruction allegations, millions face famine exacerbation; the country already grapples with drought displacing 3.8 million.

South Sudan mirrors this: Aid halts in Jonglei and reviews in Western Bahr el-Ghazal target official theft, but they jeopardise food for seven million in acute insecurity. Across sub-Saharan Africa, 2025 aid cuts already slashed education and health funding by billions, per Nonprofit Quarterly reports.

Trade and Investment Disruptions on

Beyond humanitarian aid, withdrawals from climate bodies such as the UNFCCC hinder Africa’s green transition financing. U.S. pullout from the International Solar Alliance deprives solar projects in sun-rich nations like Kenya and Ethiopia of technical grants. For business leaders, this signals volatility: Reduced UN stability could deter FDI, already down 10 per cent in Africa amid global retreats. Policymakers must pivot to intra-African trade under AfCFTA to buffer losses.

Disruptions in Skills Transfer and Capacity Building

Skills transfer in Africa, which are vital for building local capabilities, relies on UN programmes now defunded. UNESCO’s education initiatives, which trained 500,000 African teachers last year, face cuts, stalling Science Technology Engineering and Math (STEM) and vocational progress. In health, WHO’s technical assistance for disease surveillance in Ebola-prone West Africa evaporates, further undermining the continent’s weak pandemic preparedness.

South Sudan’s aid pauses halt USAID-backed agriculture training, affecting two million farmers reliant on skills for resilient cropping. Somalia’s WFP warehouse incident not only lost nutritional aid but disrupted logistics training for local staff.

Broader Human Capital Gaps

These cuts look set to exacerbate brain drain: Without U.S.-funded fellowships via UN entities, African professionals miss global exposure, weakening their capacity in the decades ahead. A Brookings analysis warns of a “shadow revolution” in U.S. policy, slashing the Middle East and African programmes by up to 50 per cent in analogous 2025 cuts. For investors, this means higher risks in unskilled labour markets; opportunities lie in private-led training via AfDB’s $2 billion youth employability funds.

Shake-Up in International Order: Africa’s Evolving Role

The international order shake-up from Trump international policy accelerates multipolarity. U.S. retreats from UN Human Rights Council and peacekeeping cede influence to China, whose Belt and Road has invested $50 billion in African infrastructure since 2020. In Somalia, reduced AMISOM support could empower non-Western actors, altering security dynamics.

Africa’s 55 votes in the UN General Assembly gain leverage; the continent could push for reforms, as seen in AU demands for permanent Security Council seats.

Trade and Diplomacy Realignment

Global aid to Africa diversifies: EU and Japan may step up, but with strings on governance. For policymakers, this prompts stronger South-South ties—e.g., Brazil’s tech transfers in agriculture. Businesses benefit from AfCFTA’s tariff reductions, potentially adding $450 billion to intra-African trade by 2035, offsetting U.S. losses.

African nations must accelerate self-financing: Ethiopia’s homegrown wheat initiative reduced imports by 50 per cent in 2025. Pan-African funds like the Africa50 infrastructure platform could mobilise $10 billion for health and education gaps.

Investment Horizons for Global Players

For investors, the vacuum invites entry: Private equity in African tech (e.g., fintech for aid distribution) surged 20 per cent in 2025. Policymakers should incentivise PPPs, as in Kenya’s digital health hubs.

Trump’s U.S. withdrawal from UN inflicts short-term pain on Africa’s financing and skills ecosystems, potentially worsening famines in Somalia and South Sudan. Yet, this international order shake-up catalyzes African agency—fostering innovation, regional integration, and diversified partnerships. Business leaders eyeing the continent’s $3 trillion market should act now: the seeds of resilience are sown in adversity.

The U.S. withdrawal covers 31 United Nations entities and 35 non-UN organisations. See below:-

31 United Nations Entities

• Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA)
• UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) – Economic Commission for Africa
• UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
• UN Democracy Fund
• UN Energy
• UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women)
• UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
• UN Human Settlements Programmememe (UN-Habitat)
• UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR)
• UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR)
• UN Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA)
• UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)
• UN Population Fund (UNFPA)
• UN Regional Economic Commissions
• UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) – funding already restricted
• UN System Staff College
• UN Water
• UN University
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
• Other UN specialized agencies and programmes deemed contrary to U.S. interests (as listed in the memorandum)

35 Non-UN Organisations

• 24/7 Carbon-Free Energy Compact
• Colombo Plan Council
• Commission for Environmental Cooperation
• Global Counterterrorism Forum
• International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance
• International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
• International Solar Alliance
• Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation
• Pan-American Institute for Geography and History
• International Cotton Advisory Committee
• International Tropical Timber Organisation
• International Lead and Zinc Study Group
• Science and Technology Centre in Ukraine
• Other non-UN entities focused on climate, gender, development, and governance (full list available in the White House memorandum.

Read also: US-Kenya Trade Takes a Hit: Why Imports from America Fell