🔴 Website 👉 https://u-s-news.com/
Telegram 👉 https://t.me/usnewscom_channel
The WHO’s new Pandemic Agreement demands nations surrender 20% of their vaccines and medical supplies during global health emergencies, raising serious questions about American sovereignty and individual freedoms.
Key Takeaways
- The World Health Assembly adopted the first-ever WHO Pandemic Agreement that requires nations to share 20% of vaccines and therapeutics during health emergencies
- The agreement includes provisions for combating “misinformation” and implementing social measures like lockdowns, raising concerns about censorship and freedom
- President Trump has started the process of withdrawing the United States from the WHO, emphasizing national sovereignty
- Critics warn the agreement could lead to a global surveillance state with digital IDs and increased control over individual freedoms
- The agreement was adopted by consensus with 124 nations in favor, but the United States did not send representatives for the first time since 1948
Global Health Authority vs. National Sovereignty
The World Health Organization’s 78th World Health Assembly in Geneva recently adopted the first-ever Pandemic Agreement, a framework supposedly designed to enhance global collaboration during future health emergencies. The agreement, resulting from three years of negotiations following the COVID-19 pandemic, requires nations to provide the WHO with 20% of their real-time production of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics during health emergencies. This controversial pact also mandates that countries implement social measures such as physical distancing and mask-wearing when directed, prompting serious concerns about national sovereignty and government overreach.
“The world is safer today thanks to the leadership, collaboration and commitment of our Member States to adopt the historic WHO Pandemic Agreement,” said Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General.
While proponents claim the agreement respects national sovereignty, the fine print tells a different story. Nations are required to amend their laws to comply with WHO directives and surrender critical medical resources during emergencies. The agreement was adopted by consensus at the World Health Assembly, with a preliminary vote of 124 in favor, zero objections, and 11 abstentions. Notably, the United States did not send representatives to the WHO meeting for the first time since 1948, as President Trump has begun the process of withdrawing from the organization.
Threats to Freedom and Privacy
Perhaps most concerning are provisions aimed at preventing what the WHO terms ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation,’ which the agreement labels as public health risks. This language could provide cover for widespread censorship of dissenting medical opinions and criticism of official narratives. The pact also includes requirements for health IDs, raising fears about expanded surveillance and potential travel restrictions or vaccine mandates. The agreement’s whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach threatens to expand bureaucratic control over virtually all aspects of life during declared health emergencies.
“The WHO has become mired in bureaucratic bloat, entrenched paradigms, conflicts of interest, and international power politics. While the United States has provided the lion’s share of the organization’s funding historically, other countries such as China, have exerted undue influence over its operations in ways that serve their own interests,” said Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
The Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing (PABS) system, a particularly contentious component of the agreement, requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to provide 20% of their production for WHO-directed equitable distribution, primarily to developing countries. Critics warn this system could increase the risk of lab leaks and potential bioterrorist attacks by expanding access to dangerous pathogens. The final details of this system have been deferred to future negotiations, but the framework’s intent is clear: redistribute medical resources according to WHO priorities rather than national interests.
Thank God.
The United States did not sign the International Pandemic Agreement. According to multiple sources, the U.S. withdrew from the negotiations in January 2025, following President Donald Trump’s announcement to exit the World Health Organization (WHO) by 2026.
The U.S.… https://t.co/D6AKDCfWUt
— Oh!Snap!
America First: Trump Administration’s Response
President Trump’s administration has taken decisive steps to withdraw from the WHO, emphasizing America’s sovereign right to determine its own health policies. Republican lawmakers have introduced bills to formally withdraw the U.S. from the organization and cut all funding. This action follows a pattern of the Trump administration prioritizing national sovereignty over globalist agendas by withdrawing from various international organizations and agreements that fail to put American interests first. Despite these efforts, critics warn the agreement could still impact Americans through its influence on global travel, trade, and medical supply chains.
“Far from ceding sovereignty, the agreement actually affirms national sovereignty and national responsibility in its foundational principles,” he wrote in February 2024. “Indeed, the agreement is itself an exercise of sovereignty.” said WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
The director-general’s claims that the agreement affirms sovereignty directly contradict its actual provisions requiring nations to surrender control over medical resources and implement WHO-directed social measures. The Trump administration’s withdrawal from WHO represents a crucial defense of American independence in determining our own public health responses without international dictates. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the dangers of centralized control and one-size-fits-all approaches to public health, as well as the threats to freedom posed by expansive emergency powers. This agreement would only further entrench those problems under global bureaucratic management.
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.rightwing.org and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.