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
Times
37 minutes ago
- Times
Trump fires statistics chief over ‘rigged' jobs figures
President Trump has fired the head of the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) after claiming jobs figures had been 'rigged' to suggest the economy was performing worse than expected. In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump accused Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the government agency, of manipulating the numbers both before and after last year's presidential election to favour the Democrats over the Republicans. He did not provide any direct evidence to support his claims against McEntarfer, an economist who was nominated for the role by Joe Biden in July 2023. The latest statistics, released on Friday, showed only 73,000 jobs had been added in July, well below the expected figure of 110,000, while the numbers for May and June were revised downwards. 'In my opinion, today's jobs numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad,' Trump wrote, insisting that 'the economy is BOOMING under 'TRUMP' '. He added: 'We need accurate Jobs Numbers. I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY. She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.' The US labour secretary, Lori Chavez-De Remer, backed the move and claimed that 'a recent string of major revisions have come to light and raised concerns about decisions being made by the Biden-appointed Labor commissioner'. McEntarfer did not directly respond to the allegations but said in a statement on social media: 'It has been the honour of my life to serve as commissioner of BLS alongside the many dedicated civil servants tasked with measuring a vast and dynamic economy. It is vital and important work and I thank them for their service to this nation.' Her role will be taken over by the deputy commissioner of the BLS, William Wiatrowski, until a replacement is nominated by Trump and confirmed by the Senate. The decision to fire McEntarfer was criticised by several Republican senators as well as the previous commissioner of the BLS, William Beach, who was nominated by Trump. Beach said the sacking set a 'dangerous precedent' and described the allegation of faked figures as 'totally groundless'. In a statement issued jointly with another former commissioner, Erica Groshen, he said: 'This escalates the president's unprecedented attacks on the independence and integrity of the federal statistical system.' • Federal Reserve holds interest rates despite Donald Trump pressure The jobs estimates were produced in the same way every month and revisions were carried out every month 'to reflect slower-arriving, more-accurate information', he said, adding that Trump was seeking 'to blame someone for unwelcome economic news'. Rand Paul, Cynthia Lummis and Thom Tillis, the Republican senators, also questioned the reasons for dismissal. Tillis told NBC: 'If she was just fired because the president or whoever decided to fire the director just did it because they didn't like the numbers, they ought to grow up.' The latest report showed the manufacturing sector reported its third consecutive month of job losses, with factory jobs down by 11,000 in July, despite Trump's efforts to use tariffs to encourage companies to manufacture more goods in the US. Government lay-offs also weighed on payrolls, the sector losing 12,000 jobs. The US Department of Labor reported that hiring in May and June was weaker than it had previously stated. Employers added 258,000 fewer jobs across those two months than previously forecast. The unemployment rate rose to 4.2 per cent from 4.1 per cent in June. Trump remained unrepentant as he left the White House on Friday, telling reporters: 'I believe the numbers were phoney, just like they were before the election, and there were other times — so you know what I did? I fired her. And you know what I did? The right thing.'
The Guardian
38 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Good, mad and ugly: the US economy's performance under Trump
According to Donald Trump's White House, the US economy is booming, inflation is dead and jobs are surging. A blizzard of economic reports has cast a pall on such claims in recent days. This week's data on Trump's early economic record was mixed – good, mad and ugly – with jobs numbers so weak he reached for the catchphrase he once used to build himself into a reality TV star: you're fired. The picture is chaotic, with robust headline growth in the world's largest economy, wild swings in trade, and a remarkable slowdown in the labor market. For six months, Trump has staged an extraordinary campaign to overhaul the global economy and extract concessions from Washington's allies and rivals by threatening and imposing steep tariffs on their US exports. But the unpredictable, erratic rollout of this strategy has already had bizarre consequences. On the surface, at least, this week's deluge of data opened with good news: the US economy returned to growth in the second quarter, with gross domestic product (GDP) – a broad measure of economic health – expanding at a rate not seen since last summer. But this followed an unexpected contraction in the first quarter, and underlined some more concerning figures, such as a 15.6% drop in private domestic investment. Businesses have been struggling to keep up with the hour-by-hour jerks and jolts on sweeping economies policies. Yes, there was good growth in the last quarter but in the first six months, the US economy grew at a mediocre 1.2%. The Wall Street Journal called it 'the weirdest GDP report ever'. Delve a bit deeper, and you start to see how the US economy is grappling with a series of extraordinary forces as Trump hammers out his trade strategy. Firms spent much of the first quarter waiting for the president to reveal his plans for tariffs: which countries would be targeted, at what rates, and when. They stockpiled, triggering an unprecedented surge in imports that pushed growth into the red. In the second quarter, however, as Trump started to ramp up his economic attacks, imports tumbled at an equally astonishing pace. Net exports – how much a country exports more than it imports – boosted GDP. This is Trump's least favorite chart. Despite his many public demands, threats and attacks, the Federal Reserve has not yet cut interest rates this year. Why? Jerome Powell, the central bank's chair, has repeatedly argued it should wait and see the impact of the president's trade strategy before moving. Fed officials are worried that inflation – despite Trump's claims that it has collapsed on his watch – has actually remained stubborn, and might rise as a result of his tariffs. This has gone down extremely poorly in the White House, where officials are counting down the weeks until Powell's term as chair ends next May. Data released on Friday fundamentally changed the way US policymakers and politicians think about the economy. Until then, many inside the Fed thought everything was broadly ticking over nicely – and Trump administration officials claimed they were overseeing a boom in activity. But July's employment report revealed far fewer jobs were created that month than economists had expected, and revised down estimates for May and June by an astonishing 258,000. Job creation has stalled. 'Look, this jobs report isn't ideal,' Stephen Miran, chairman of the White House council of economic advisers, told CNN, before suggesting that fading uncertainty around trade and fiscal policy would lead to significant improvement. 'It's all going to get much, much better from here,' he added.
The Guardian
39 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Europe's trade deal with the US was dead on arrival – it needs to be buried. Here's how to do it
Ursula von der Leyen's Turnberry golf course deal has been rightly called a capitulation and a humiliation for Europe. Assuming such an accord would put an end to Donald Trump's coercion and bullying was either naive or the result of a miserable delusion. The EU should now steel itself and reject the terms imposed by Trump. Is this deal really as bad as it sounds? Unfortunately, it is, for at least three reasons. The blow to Europe's international credibility is incalculable in a world that expects the EU to stand up for reciprocity and rules-based trade, to resist Washington's coercion as Canada, China and Brazil have, rather than condoning it. Economically, it's a damaging one-way street: EU exporters lose market access in the US while the EU market is hit by more favoured US competition. Core European industrial sectors such as pharma and steel and aluminium are left by the wayside. The balance also tilts in the US's favour in important sectors such as consumer goods, food and drink, and agriculture. Tariffs tend to stick, so this is long-term damage. The EU even gives up its right to respond to future US pressures through duties on digital services or network fees. To top it off, von der Leyen's defence and investment pledges (for which she had no mandate) go against Europe's interest. The EU's competitiveness predicament is precisely one of net investment outflows. As international capital now reallocates under the pressures of Trumponomics and a weakening dollar, the case for Europe to become a strategic investment power was strengthening. Von der Leyen's promise of $600bn in EU investment in the US is therefore disastrous messaging. How could this happen? All EU member states wanted to avoid Trump's 30% tariff threat and a trade war, but none perhaps as much as Germany and Ireland, supported by German carmakers and US big tech firms. Yet Irish sweetheart digital tax deals, as well as BMW and Mercedes's plans to move production hubs to the US (also to serve the EU market), cannot be Europe's future. EU governments were distinctly unhelpful in building the EU's negotiating position. But in the end, it was von der Leyen who blinked and she has to take responsibility. Her close team took control in the closing weeks and went into the final meeting manifestly prepared only to say yes, which made Trump's steamrolling inevitable. Let's think of the counterfactual: if von der Leyen had stepped into the room and rejected these terms, Trump's wrath and some market turmoil may have ensued. But ultimately it would very likely have come to a postponement, a new negotiation and, at some point, a different deal that would not be so lopsided or unilaterally trade away deep and long-term European interests and principles. Instead, von der Leyen became a supplicant to a triumphant Trump. The situation is reminiscent of the final rounds of the Brexit negotiations five years ago when von der Leyen similarly was giving in to unacceptable demands from Boris Johnson, only to U-turn under pressure from a steelier EU chief negotiator and a quartet of member states. Today, von der Leyen runs Brussels with a strong presidential hand and has largely done away with internal checks and balances inside the commission. That is her prerogative and her style, but the upshot should not be weak, ineffective and unprincipled dealings on Europe's major geopolitical challenges, from Trump to Gaza. The 'deal' in Scotland is in reality an unstable interim accord. Nothing is yet inked or signed; Washington and Brussels are already locking horns on its interpretation and negotiations on the finer (and broader) points are ongoing. The 27 EU governments will inevitably get involved as the final deal needs to be translated into an international agreement and EU law. Some big powers – Germany and Italy seemingly – are on board, reluctant or not. However, internal political dynamics may change their calculations. Opposition parties and rightwing contenders who are a real political threat to leaders in Germany and France are already lambasting the deal. Unless von der Leyen strikes a dirty bargain with the member states, the European parliament will also have a say. The longtime chair of its trade committee, Bernd Lange, has set the tone for how the deal would be viewed there, calling it 'asymmetry set in stone' and even 'a misery'. As details seep out on what von der Leyen has really agreed to and what the US expects from the EU, and all the consequences become clear, an already unpalatable deal may become even more so. Weakening US economic data and returning stock market jitters show that Trump's negotiation footing is fragile. His new tariff threats come with new extensions, up to 90 days in the case of Mexico, as his position is overstretched. For Europe, the lesson from the Brexit negotiations – one that von der Leyen ought to have grasped before now – is that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. There is now an opportunity for EU governments and the European parliament to course correct and salvage something from this train wreck. Georg Riekeles is the associate director of the European Policy Centre, and Varg Folkman is policy analyst at the European Policy Centre
