PYQ Vault · Paper 2 · Contemporary Global Concerns — II
The withdrawal of the United States of America from the World Health Organization is set to have far- reaching impacts on global health. Reimagining the existing WHO is vital for the global health agenda. Discuss.
How the answer moves
The flow snapshot — the routes in, the body, the counter-view and the routes out.
Flow snapshot — how the answer moves
Intro routes
R1 US founded WHO (1948), principal funder + agenda-driver (surveillance, PEPFAR) → exit raises existential questions for global health governance G@R1 withdrawal as latest US unilateralism (like Paris exit) → deepens democratic deficit in global governance
Body flow
immediate impacts (funding gaps, reduced US influence, widening health inequities, weakened pandemic coordination, eroded trust) → domino/legitimacy risk (populist /nationalist agendas superseding multilateralism; US loses surveillance + early-warning access) → these expose Stiglitz’s accountability deficit (opaque, unaccountable institutions) → reimagining begins → diversify + stabilise financing (no single donor) → transparency + streamlined decisions + Independent Panel recommendations → greater voice for emerging economies + non-state actors (representation)
Counter-view
nationalist-unilateralist retreat (sovereignty over multilateral commitments) vs. interdependence (borderless threats, shared vulnerability, no one safe until all safe) @ 00 population secure until all protected → Linklater’s post-national community of shared problems → multilateral solidarity as safeguard
Conclusion routes
G9 crisis as opportunity → reimagine a more representative, better-financed, more effective WHO
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
