The Second US Withdrawal from UNESCO: Trump’s ‘Woke’ Rhetoric and Its Effects on Cultural Diplomacy

As Donald Trump reimplements the US withdrawal from UNESCO in 2025, questions arise over America’s global role, the future of multilateralism, and the shifting balance of cultural influence toward powers like China. This essay unpacks the political motives, international reactions, and institutional consequences of this decision.

In 2025, US President Donald Trump decided to withdraw from UNESCO once again. This decision is a concrete reflection of the US’s increasing distance from multilateral international institutions and its “America-first” foreign policy approach. The Trump administration has criticised UNESCO for what it sees as its “extreme pro-social justice” and “anti-American” stances, arguing that the institution has adopted policies that conflict with US national interests.

Sensitive issues, such as the 2011 admission of Palestine, were particularly highlighted. This withdrawal has the effect of weakening the US’s cultural and diplomatic influence, while concomitantly paving the way for the rise of China and other countries in international arenas. Moreover, it has the potential to cause significant shifts in regional and global political balances by weakening the principle of multilateralism and the mechanisms of international cooperation (Amiri and Petrequin, 2025).

The decision of the Trump administration to withdraw from UNESCO is regarded as a substantial development, marking a continuation of the United States’ pattern of withdrawing from international organisations. The United States, which withdrew from UNESCO in 2019 due to perceived anti-Israel bias, rejoined in 2023 during the Biden administration.

Nevertheless, Trump’s reimplementation of this decision during his second term in office is indicative of a shift in his foreign policy. White House Press Secretary Anna Kelly asserted that the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is involved in the promotion of contentious social and cultural agendas that are at odds with policies shaped by American votes. The accusation made by the State Department against UNESCO was that it was pursuing a “globalist and ideological development agenda” (Markus, 2025).

International Responses and Institutional Resilience

UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay has stated that she regarded the US withdrawal as a predictable development and that the institution has become more financially resilient. However, French President Emmanuel Macron has expressed his continued support for UNESCO, asserting that the withdrawal of the United States will not compromise the organisation’s strength.

Nevertheless, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has characterised the decision taken by the United States as irresponsible and has stated that the Ministry fully supports the work of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). It was emphasised that the financial and programmatic impact of the withdrawal would be limited, as only 8% of UNESCO’s budget is funded by the US.

The relationship between the United States and UNESCO has experienced periods of both collaboration and discord. Withdrawals occurred in 1984 and 2017 due to the organisation’s financial mismanagement and perceived anti-American attitudes. However, participation resumed in 2003 and 2023. Moreover, the Trump administration also withdrew from other international institutions, including the World Health Organization, the Paris Climate Agreement, and the UN Human Rights Council. During its second term, however, the administration took some steps back.

The government of Israel has expressed its support for the United States’ decision to withdraw from UNESCO. Israel accused UNESCO of consistently displaying anti-Israel bias. The US decision was called “a necessary step toward fair treatment and political neutrality”. US Senator Jeanne Shaheen, however, has expressed concerns that this decision may be indicative of a lack of foresight, suggesting that it could result in an augmentation of Chinese influence within UNESCO.

UNESCO continues to function as a pivotal institution, safeguarding cultural heritage sites such as the Grand Canyon, the Egyptian pyramids, and the Statue of Liberty, while also establishing international standards in the domains of education and science. Director-General Azoulay emphasised that the US’s reasons for withdrawing are not significantly different from those of seven years ago, and that the institution has carried out significant work in Holocaust education and combating anti-Semitism (Chiacu and Irish, 2025).

The United States of America has formally declared its intention to withdraw from the Organisation of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) at the conclusion of the present year. The rationale underlying this decision encompassed the organisation’s endorsement of “divisive social and cultural agendas” and the incongruity of US policies concerning the 2011 admission of Palestine as an observer state.

This decision signified a considerable financial and symbolic loss for the Paris-based institution. The United States had been contributing to significant projects, including UNESCO’s World Heritage Sites programme. The organisation’s remit encompasses the protection of over 1,200 cultural and natural heritage sites across 170 countries, including such iconic structures as the Taj Mahal, the Pyramids of Giza, and Notre Dame Cathedral.

In accordance with the “America First” policy initiated by the Trump administration, a rise in national park entrance fees for foreign tourists was implemented. This decision was underpinned by the notion that these sites would be primarily designed to serve American interests.

UNESCO’s activities extend beyond the realm of cultural heritage conservation, encompassing a diverse array of international initiatives, including the establishment of standards for artificial intelligence, the preservation of biodiversity, and the promotion of quality education. The withdrawal of the United States from UNESCO could potentially result in an increase in the influence of China and other strategic rivals within the organisation. This, in turn, could have a detrimental effect on UNESCO’s ability to establish international standards (Popli, 2025).

Geopolitical Impacts and Consequences on Multilateralism

UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay articulated profound despondency in the wake of the United States’ decision to rescind its membership of the organisation. She emphasised that this decision contravenes the principles of multilateralism and stated that the organisation has become more financially resilient thanks to the structural reforms and diversification of funding implemented since 2018. UNESCO continues to implement significant projects in critical areas such as Holocaust education, the protection of cultural heritage, the ethics of artificial intelligence, and education in conflict zones.

Azoulay (n.d.) contends that the US’s motivations for withdrawal are unchanged since seven years prior. However, she asserts that UNESCO continues to serve as a pivotal forum for multilateral collaboration. Despite diminishing resources, she asserted that the organisation would persevere in its mission and that the United States would invariably stand as a steadfast ally at UNESCO’s doorstep.

Furthermore, she asserted that cooperation with the American private sector, academia, and civil society will be maintained, and that political dialogue with the US administration will persist (UNESCO, 2025).

The United States of America is a major financial contributor to UNESCO, thereby assuming a pivotal role in safeguarding cultural heritage, promoting education, and advancing scientific research within the framework of the organisation’s global initiatives. The withdrawal of the United States from UNESCO resulted in a significant reduction in the organisation’s financial resources. However, financial reforms implemented in recent years, along with increased contributions from other member countries, have prevented the organisation from becoming completely dysfunctional (UNESCO, n.d.).

Nevertheless, the absence of technical expertise and diplomatic influence from the United States could potentially hinder UNESCO’s operations. Moreover, the withdrawal presents an opportunity for other major powers, such as China, to increase their influence at UNESCO, thereby creating new balances in international cooperation and multilateralism. This situation signals the onset of a period characterised by substantial change, which will test UNESCO’s capacity to establish global standards and maintain political impartiality.

The US withdrawal from UNESCO in 2025 may have a limited short-term financial impact, but it is a development that could lead to geopolitical shifts in the organisation’s decision-making dynamics in the long term. The growing influence of rival powers, particularly China, poses new challenges to UNESCO’s impartiality and its capacity to set global norms. Despite the institution’s recent gains in resilience, attributable in part to reforms implemented in recent years, the principle of multilateralism is currently undergoing a significant stress test, as evidenced by the institution’s loss of access to the United States’ technical expertise and diplomatic influence.

This decision signals not only an institutional rupture between the two actors but also a broader rupture in which the balance of power in the international order is being reshaped. The vacuum created by the US withdrawal has implications at political, symbolic, and normative levels, increasing uncertainty about the future of multilateral institutions.

Bibliography