U.S. says it's leaving UN cultural agency UNESCO again, only two years after rejoining
'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 deputy spokesperson Anna Kelly told the New York Post. UNESCO and the White House did not immediately confirm the US move.
This will be the third time that the United States has left UNESCO, which is based in Paris, and the second time during a Trump administration. President Donald Trump had already pulled out during his first term and the United States returned after a five-year absence after the Biden administration applied to rejoin the organisation.
The decision will take effect at the end of December 2026.
The decision will come as no surprise to UNESCO officials, who had anticipated such a move following the specific review ordered by the Trump administration earlier this year. They also expected that Mr. Trump would pull out again since the return of the US in 2023 had been promoted by a political rival, former President Joe Biden.
The Trump administration in 2017 announced that the U.S. would withdraw from UNESCO, citing anti-Israel bias. That decision took effect a year later. The U.S. and Israel stopped financing UNESCO after it voted to include Palestine as a member state in 2011.
The United States previously pulled out of UNESCO under the Reagan administration in 1984 because it viewed the agency as mismanaged, corrupt and used to advance the interests of the Soviet Union. It rejoined in 2003 during George W Bush's presidency.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
5 minutes ago
- Business Standard
End US visa programs: Why Trump supporters want H-1B visa removed
Once again, the H-1B visa, much loved by Indian professionals, is back in the spotlight—this time, for all the wrong reasons. Amid a fresh wave of layoffs in the US tech sector, questions are mounting over why companies are continuing to hire foreign workers through the H-1B route while cutting jobs at home. After Microsoft laid off around 9,000 employees in phases earlier this year, Intel has now announced plans to slash over 25,000 jobs. The backlash has been swift. US Vice President JD Vance on Friday publicly criticised Microsoft, saying he does not buy the 'bulls**t story' that the company can't find qualified American workers. 'That displacement and that math worries me a bit,' Vance said at a bipartisan event hosted by the Hill and Valley Forum. 'We want the very best and the brightest to make America their home. But I don't want companies to fire 9,000 American workers and then to go and say, 'We can't find workers here in America.' That's a bulls**t story,' said Vance. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, a vocal critic of the H-1B system, called for an end to all employment-based visa programmes. 'We need to cut all the visa programs. If we are going to do it, let's do it hard-core and clean it up,' said Bannon on his podcast. He said foreign workers were not better educated, but tech companies wanted 'indentured servants' who would work under pressure for less money. 'The situation in Silicon Valley is a festering sore,' Bannon said, claiming that around 12 million trained IT graduates in the US are unemployed while jobs are given to visa holders. 'There is always a way to get 'Einsteins',' he said, adding that talented individuals should be encouraged to stay in their home countries and 'make them great again like they are doing in Japan'. Vance's remarks were quickly countered by an Indian-origin tech investor who accused him of misleading the public. In a post on X, the investor wrote, 'Microsoft didn't bring in new foreign workers after laying people off, they renewed visas for long-time employees who've been in the U.S. legally for many many years, stuck in green card backlogs.' He argued that companies were simply allowing employees to stay in the roles they had already earned. 'Saying that's 'replacing Americans' is like saying letting a loyal employee stay and renew his visa is the same as hiring someone new off the street,' the post said. The investor also pointed out that many of the 9,000 employees laid off were H-1B holders. 'They got no severance, no safety net, just a 60-day countdown to leave the country. If you care about fairness, fix the backlog. Don't weaponise lies.' US weighs change to H-1B selection system At the policy level, the Trump administration is reviewing changes to how H-1B visas are awarded. The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in a filing to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs earlier this month, proposed replacing the current lottery system with a 'weighted selection process'. The change would apply to the capped portion of the visa programme—85,000 visas per year, including 65,000 for general applicants and 20,000 for those with advanced degrees from US universities. The rule is still under review and the specifics are yet to be made public, but US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is listed as the implementing agency. 'The H-1B is the primary way through which the United States attracts high-skilled immigrants. That it is randomly allocated is insane,' said Connor O'Brien, a research analyst at the Economic Innovation Group. He added, 'Eliminating the H-1B lottery in favour of a system that prioritises higher earners first is a no-brainer... Giving away these visas randomly is an enormous, missed opportunity to attract truly scarce talent.' Federal agency warns against bias in hiring The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has issued a warning to employers, saying that favouring foreign workers over American citizens in recruitment violates federal law. 'Unlawful bias against American workers, in violation of Title VII, is a large-scale problem in multiple industries nationwide,' said EEOC acting chair Andrea Lucas on February 19, 2025. She alleged that some companies had policies that preferred illegal aliens, migrant workers, and visa holders over American workers. 'The law applies to you, and you are not above the law,' she said. 'The EEOC is here to protect all workers from unlawful national origin discrimination, including American workers.' The agency outlined common reasons for such practices: * Lower wage costs through loopholes or off-the-books payments * Assumptions that foreign workers are less likely to raise complaints * Client preferences for foreign workers * Perceptions that foreign workers have a stronger work ethic Counterview: H-1B workers are well-paid and boost US economy The American Immigration Council disputes the notion that H-1B workers harm domestic employment. Its research shows that in 2021, H-1B holders had a median salary of 108,000, more than double the national average of 45,760. Between 2003 and 2021, their median wage rose by 52 per cent, compared to 39 per cent for the general workforce. 'The US economy relies on H-1B visas to address skilled labour shortages, particularly in technology, engineering, and healthcare, where domestic supply is insufficient,' Jidesh Kumar, managing partner at King Stubb & Kasiva, told Business Standard. 'Tech giants and startups alike depend on H-1B professionals for cutting-edge research and product development. Many also go on to become entrepreneurs, creating jobs and boosting the economy.' Kumar warned that tightening the programme could drive global talent to other destinations. 'Restricting the programme could force top global talent to seek opportunities in countries like Canada or the UK, potentially undermining the US's position as a leader in innovation and economic growth,' he said. Indian applicants dominate H-1B pool In the 2023 financial year, about 191,000 Indian professionals were granted H-1B visas. The number rose to approximately 207,000 in FY 2024. Despite this, over one million Indians remain stuck in the employment-based green card backlog due to country-specific quotas and annual limits, according to USCIS data. For FY 2026, USCIS selected 120,141 H-1B registrations—a sharp drop from previous years and the lowest since 2021. Analysts have linked this to increased scrutiny of multiple registrations and a hike in the application fee.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
5 minutes ago
- First Post
Did EU get a raw deal in Trump trade pact? 7 facts
While the agreement may have averted a full-blown trade war and restored some predictability, many analysts argue the EU signed away too much: steep tariffs, massive purchases and little leverage in return. Whether this fiscal toll brings long-term value or leaves Brussels as a weaker negotiator remains under scrutiny. read more The sweeping trade agreement unveiled Sunday between the United States and European Union, forged under intense pressure from President Donald Trump, has sent shockwaves through European capitals, with many questionings whether the deal leaves the EU at a stark disadvantage. Here are seven crucial facts illustrating the challenges and concessions embedded in the pact: US imposes across-the-board 15% tariff on EU exports The agreement sets a 15% baseline tariff on nearly all EU goods entering the US, a sharp escalation from the previous average US tariff of about 1.6% on a trade-weighted basis for EU products. Core EU exports, including cars, machinery and manufactured goods are now hit by the full 15% rate. While this prevented Trump's threatened 30% or even 50% duties, it remains a dramatic rise and the highest generalised tariff level imposed on the EU in decades. Major EU concessions on US energy A central element of the deal is the EU's agreement to purchase approximately $750 billion in US energy over the coming years, with a particular focus on liquefied natural gas (LNG) to replace Russian supplies. This marks one of the largest single-sector purchase commitments ever included in a transatlantic trade deal and reflects significant US leverage on Europe's energy security. $600 billion in new EU investments in the US Brussels has agreed to direct around $600 billion in additional investments to the United States in forthcoming years, covering green energy, manufacturing, and military equipment. For context, this matches the scale of the recently announced EU investment pledges for China, underlining the magnitude of this concession. Deal struck during Trump's private tour The agreement was finalised on Trump's private golf estate in Scotland outside EU soil while the UK, no longer a member of the EU, secured a different trade arrangement with the US seen as more favourable. The optics highlight a European desperation to avert more punitive tariffs especially as London was exempted from the harshest terms on steel and aluminium. EU pulls back on retaliation, misses broader show of strength In opting for a settlement, Brussels scrapped or dialled back threatened counter-tariffs, unlike China and Canada both of which have previously matched Trump's measures step for step. Some analysts and European commentators argue the EU missed a chance to assert broader strength instead settling under pressure to avoid economic escalation. Trump's core agenda intact: Steel and aluminium tariffs remain unchanged Despite EU negotiating efforts, the deal leaves in place Trump's 50% tariffs on European steel and aluminium, with only vague promises of a future quota-based relaxation. These metals remain an especially sore point among EU industry lobbyists and the longevity of these trade barriers highlights the limited EU leverage in core strategic sectors. Narrow exemptions: Some sectors spared but automobiles face full impact Certain sectors notably aircraft parts, select chemicals and some agri-products won zero-tariff exemption status. However, automobiles, representing a major chunk of EU exports to the US, fall under the full 15% tariff, a significant new cost for German, French and Italian carmakers already grappling with global market headwinds. While European leaders hailed the agreement as 'providing certainty' and averting a full-scale trade war, many in Europe see it as a lopsided settlement extracted at a moment of vulnerability. The tariff levels, energy purchase commitments, and investment pledges all signify a substantial shift in the transatlantic economic balance, one that, at least for now, appears to favour the US and President Trump's tough bargaining tactics. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
News18
12 minutes ago
- News18
‘Disappointed' With Putin, Donald Trump Threatens To Reduce 50-Day Ukraine Truce Deadline
Trump had earlier given Russia 50 days to end the fighting or face "very severe" economic sanctions. However, Russia has rebuffed US efforts for a ceasefire with Ukraine. US President Donald Trump on Monday threatened to reduce a 50-day deadline for Russia to come to a settlement with Ukraine or face 'severe" economic sanctions, saying he was disappointed in Russian President Vladimir Putin for not committing to a ceasefire. 'I've spoken to President Putin a lot. We got along really well… We thought we had it settled numerous times, and then President Putin goes out and starts launching rockets into some city like Kyiv and kills people in a nursing home or whatever. Bodies lying all over the street," he told reporters alongside British PM Keir Starmer and his wife in Turnberry, Scotland. This is a developing story. More details are awaited. Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
