Country announced its departure from WHO on Wednesday (5)
Maurício Businari – The Javier Government’s decision Milei of removing Argentina from the WHO (World Health Organization) rekindled the debate on sovereignty and international cooperation. Experts heard by UOL evaluate the impacts of the measure.
Argentina announced its departure from WHO on Wednesday (5), justifying the decision as a way to reaffirm national sovereignty. According to the presidential spokesman, Manuel Adorni, the organization imposes guidelines that limit the freedom of countries in conducting their health policies.
The Argentine government argues that the measure will allow greater flexibility in formulating health strategies, without following recommendations that, according to Milei Administration, do not consider the country’s particularities.
The measure is inserted in a global scenario of contestation to multilateralism. It follows a line similar to that adopted by former US President,
Donald Trump, who also announced the departure of the country from WHO during his term. Experts say this decision can bring both challenges and opportunities for Argentina.
Exit from WHO represents a change in Argentina’s foreign policy and can affect its relationship with other countries and international organizations. Internationalist lawyer Talita Dal Lago Fermanian,
PhD in international relations from the University of Lisbon, evaluates that the decision strengthens the control of the Argentine government about its health policies. “WHO, despite presenting itself as a technical body, imposes guidelines that often interfere directly on the internal policies of countries, as occurred during the pandemic,” he says.
However, the professor of international relations at Cruzeiro do Sul University, André Araujo, points out that participation in organizations such as WHO does not reduce the sovereignty of member countries.
“Adherence to an international organism is always an autonomous decision of each state, which may or may not follow its recommendations,” he explains. For him, the departure of Argentina can generate uncertainties about the country’s relationship with the international community and affect cooperation agreements.
Access to medicines
The Milei government argues that the decision will not compromise the population’s access to drugs and vaccines, as the country may negotiate directly with foreign laboratories and governments.
Fermanian maintains that Argentina can continue to participate in international agreements without being linked to WHO. “The organization does not finance the Argentine health system, which is maintained with internal resources,” he says.
On the other hand, Araujo warns that withdrawal can make international cooperation in public health difficult. According to him, WHO ensures access to strategic information and good practice exchange programs.
“The exit of the body can impact the functioning of the health system, as it weakens the country’s participation in global strategies against epidemics and health emergencies,” he says.
Effects for Brazil
The Argentine decision may influence other countries in the region to reevaluate their relationship with international organizations.
For Fermanian, in the short term, the departure of WHO may generate political pressures against the Milei government, but should not directly impact commercial relations on Mercosur. “If there are retaliation, they will be motivated more for ideological reasons than for real risks to regional cooperation,” he says.
Already Araujo notes that the decision follows a strategy of the Argentine government of approach with sectors more critical to multilateralism. “This can generate new tensions within Mercosur and in the relationship with international blocks,” warns
The Argentine case is similar to the departure of the United States from WHO. The lawyer points out that Washington’s decision was based on arguments similar to those of Buenos Aires, such as the search for greater autonomy.
“Even outside WHO, the US continued to access vaccines, participating in scientific research and maintaining an efficient health system,” he recalls.
Araujo points out that the American decision had great international repercussions and that Argentina can face similar challenges. “The departure reflects a tendency to contest to global institutions, but can also isolate the country from strategic decisions of public health,” he concludes.
