Trump pulls US out of UN cultural agency UNESCO for second time
The withdrawal from the Paris-based agency, which was founded after World War Two to promote peace through international cooperation in education, science, and culture, will take effect on December 31, 2026.
"President Trump has decided to withdraw the United States from UNESCO – which supports woke, divisive cultural and social causes that are totally out-of-step with the commonsense policies that Americans voted for in November," White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said.
The State Department said remaining in UNESCO was not in the national interest, accusing it of having "a globalist, ideological agenda for international development at odds with our America First foreign policy".
UNESCO chief Audrey Azoulay said she deeply regretted Trump's decision, but that it was "expected, and UNESCO has prepared for it".
The agency had diversified its sources of funding, receiving only about 8% of its budget from Washington, she said.
UNESCO was one of several international bodies Trump withdrew from during his first term, along with the World Health Organization, the Paris Agreement global climate change accord and the U.N. Human Rights Council. During his second term, he has largely reinstated those steps.
UNESCO officials said the U.S. withdrawal would have some limited impact on programs the United States was financing.
Israel welcomed the U.S. decision to quit UNESCO.
The U.S. State Department said one of the reasons for the withdrawal was UNESCO's decision to admit Palestine as a member state, which was "contrary to U.S. policy and contributed to the proliferation of anti-Israel rhetoric within the organization."
UNESCO officials said all relevant agency statements had been agreed with both Israel and the Palestinians over the past eight years.
"The reasons put forward by the United States to withdraw from the Organization are the same as seven years ago even though the situation has changed profoundly, political tensions have receded, and UNESCO today constitutes a rare forum for consensus on concrete and action-oriented multilateralism," Azoulay said.
"These claims also contradict the reality of UNESCO's efforts, particularly in the field of Holocaust education and the fight against antisemitism."
Diplomats said it was felt at UNESCO that the withdrawal was inevitable for political reasons, given that Biden had brought the U.S. back and had promised to repay arrears from the first time Trump pulled out.
UNESCO, whose full name is the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, is best known for designating World Heritage Sites, including the Grand Canyon in the United States and the ancient city of Palmyra in Syria.
The United States initially joined UNESCO at its founding in 1945 but withdrew for the first time in 1984 in protest against alleged financial mismanagement and perceived anti-U.S. bias, returning in 2003 under President George W. Bush, who said the agency had undertaken needed reforms.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economist
a few seconds ago
- Economist
Trump will not let the world move on from tariffs
When President Donald Trump stood outside the White House on April 2nd and revealed his 'Liberation Day' tariffs, all hell broke loose. The 'reciprocal' levies threatened to break financial markets, as well as scrambling international commerce. Thankfully, Mr Trump quickly backed down, cutting tariffs to 10% for most countries on April 9th and doing the same for China a month later. Markets recovered; uncertainty receded. The world economy tried to move on. Everyone began to lose interest. Everyone, that is, except Mr Trump.
Reuters
a few seconds ago
- Reuters
Oil falls $2 a barrel on worries about OPEC+ supply, US jobs data
HOUSTON, Aug 1 (Reuters) - Oil prices $2 a barrel on Friday because of jitters about a possible increase in production by OPEC and its allies, while a weaker-than-expected U.S. jobs report fed worries about demand. Brent crude futures settled at $69.67 a barrel, down $2.03, or 2.83%. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude finished at $67.33 a barrel, down $1.93, or 2.79%. Brent finished the week with a gain near 6%, while WTI rose 6.29%. Three people familiar with discussions among OPEC members and allied producers said the group may reach an agreement as early as Sunday to boost production by 548,000 barrels per day in September. A fourth source familiar with OPEC+ talks said discussions on volume were ongoing and the hike could be smaller. The U.S. Labor Department said the country added 73,000 jobs in July, lower than economists had forecast, raising the national unemployment rate to 4.2% from 4.1%. "We can blame U.S. President Donald Trump with the tariffs or we can blame the Federal Reserve for not raising interest rates," said Phil Flynn, senior analyst with Price Futures Group. "It looks like the Fed misjudged their decision on Wednesday." On Wednesday, the Fed voted to keep interest rates unchanged, drawing criticism from Trump and a chorus of Republican legislators. Oil traders have focused for much of the week on the potential impact of U.S. tariffs, with tariff rates on U.S. trading partners largely set to take effect from next Friday. Trump signed an executive order on Thursday imposing tariffs ranging from 10% to 41% on U.S. imports from dozens of countries and foreign territories that failed to reach trade deals by his Aug. 1 deadline, including Canada, India and Taiwan. Partners that managed to secure trade agreements include the European Union, South Korea, Japan and Great Britain. "We think the resolution of trade deals to the satisfaction of the market – more or less, barring a few exceptions – has been the key driver for oil price bullishness in recent days," said Suvro Sarkar at DBS Bank. Prices were also supported this week by Trump's threats to impose 100% secondary tariffs on Russian crude buyers as he seeks to pressure Russia into halting its war in Ukraine. This has stoked concern over potential disruption to oil trade flows and the removal of some oil from the market. On Thursday, JP Morgan analysts said Trump's threatened penalties on China and India over their purchases of Russian oil potentially put 2.75 million barrels per day (bpd) of Russian seaborne oil exports at risk. China and India are the world's second and third-largest crude consumers respectively.
Reuters
28 minutes ago
- Reuters
BlackRock, other fund managers lose bid to dismiss Texas climate collusion lawsuit
Aug 1 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Friday largely rejected a request by top asset managers including BlackRock (BLK.N), opens new tab to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Texas and 12 other Republican-led states that said the companies violated antitrust law through climate activism that reduced coal production and boosted energy prices. U.S. District Judge Jeremy Kernodle in Tyler, Texas agreed to dismiss just three of the 21 counts in the states' lawsuit, which also names institutional investors State Street (STT.N), opens new tab and Vanguard. The lawsuit is among the highest-profile cases targeting efforts to promote environmental, social and governance goals. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the three companies "created an investment cartel to illegally control national energy markets and squeeze more money out of hardworking Americans,' and that 'today's victory represents a major step in holding them accountable." The three asset managers said they would continue to defend against the claims, with Vanguard calling the ruling disappointing, and State Street calling the case a risk to investors and energy markets. "By pursuing forced divestment, the Attorneys General are undermining the Trump Administration's goal of American energy independence," BlackRock said. The ruling by Kernodle, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, means the states can move forward with their claims that the asset managers violated U.S. antitrust law by joining Climate Action 100+, an investor initiative to take action to combat climate change, and used their shareholder advocacy in furtherance of its goals. Kernodle, however, dismissed claims that the asset managers violated Louisiana and Nebraska consumer protection laws. The companies have denied wrongdoing and called the case "half-baked." But the states' theories have garnered support from Trump-appointed antitrust enforcers at the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission. The outcome of the lawsuit could have major implications for how the companies, which together manage some $27 trillion, approach their holdings and passive funds. One possible remedy sought by the plaintiffs would be for the fund firms to divest holdings in coal companies, which BlackRock has said would harm the companies' access to capital and likely raise energy prices.
