U.S. withdrawal from multilateralism: Limits and interpretive reassessment

Trump's foreign policy is characterised by coercive threats to further the America First agenda. This has had a cascading effect on the fundamental principles of international law. The recent move of the Trump administration to withdraw from a slew of multilateral institutions and treaties is a manifestation of this agenda. The move comes in the backdrop of the February 2025 Executive Order 14199 (EO) calling for ‘a review of all international intergovernmental organisations of which the United States is a member and provides any type of funding or other support, and all conventions and treaties to which the United States is a party’. The U.S. administration considers these international instruments as ineffective, wasteful and harmful. EO 14199 further keeps open the possibility of reviewing and withdrawing from additional international organisations. The U.S. withdrawal from these multilateral instruments is indicative of how these organisations have become a stumbling block to the enforcement of its domestic policies. Hence, withdrawal from these organisations, according to the Trump administration, becomes a convenient choice. Professor Jean Galbraith views the withdrawal as a retreat from multilateralism. This opinion discusses the withdrawal procedure under the constitutive treaty establishing these organisations and the need for interpretive reassessment.