The Last Case
In 1977, a hospital cook named Ali Maow Maalin walked into a clinic in Merca, a small town in southern Somalia. He had a fever and a rash, which wasn’t especially alarming for a man who spent his days around a hospital. Neither he nor his doctor had any idea they were witnessing something historic: the last naturally occurring case of smallpox the world would ever see.
For thousands of years this virus had disfigured pharaohs, blinded emperors, and killed an estimated half a billion people. And then, quite suddenly in historical terms, it simply stopped. No superpower bombed it out of existence. No corporation patented its way to a cure. It stopped because an organisation with no army, no territory, and no police force decided that a child’s right to health mattered more than a government’s right to look away. That organisation was the World Health Organisation, arguably the only global institution ever built entirely on cooperation rather than force.
How the WHO managed something so improbable is, at bottom, a story about what nations can do together that none of them can do alone. But it’s also a story about how fragile that cooperation really is. This isn’t an account of a flawless institution — the WHO has stumbled plenty of times. It’s the story of an almost impossible job that no single country could ever pull off by itself.
The Paradox of Power
On paper, the WHO has almost nothing that resembles real power. No tanks, no treasury, no territory to defend. If a government decides to ignore international law — hiding an outbreak, stockpiling vaccines, sitting on crucial data — there’s no WHO police force that can march in and stop them. It can’t close borders, seize a patent, or force a single parent to vaccinate their child. Everything it does depends on countries choosing, voluntarily, to cooperate. Looked at from the outside, that sounds like a fatal flaw.
Yet decade after decade, this apparent weakness has quietly become the organisation’s greatest strength. Political scientists call it normative power — the ability to shape outcomes not through wealth or weapons but through ideas, through norms strong enough to guide how people and governments behave even without anyone forcing them to.
So when the WHO announces a disease has been eradicated, markets take notice. When it revises its treatment guidelines, hospitals halfway across the world quietly rewrite their protocols overnight. When it pre-qualifies a vaccine, nations that have never agreed on a single trade deal somehow agree on this. None of that comes from a threat of punishment. Ignore the science, and the cost isn’t a fine — it’s measured in bodies.
That kind of influence stretches into places most people never think about. WHO disease classifications shape how illnesses get recorded on every continent. Its vaccine prequalification list quietly determines what United Nations agencies and dozens of low-income countries are allowed to buy. Even drug companies that have no formal obligation to the WHO tend to fall in line with its recommendations, because scientific credibility, it turns out, travels further than political authority ever could.
Consider the Ebola outbreak that tore through West Africa between 2014 and 2016. The WHO didn’t send in soldiers. It didn’t push through emergency legislation. What it sent instead were epidemiologists, lab technicians, logisticians — people who carried expertise into the outbreak zones instead of weapons. Scientists traced infection chains through villages that barely appeared on maps. Laboratories thousands of miles apart shared data in real time. If there’s one lesson pandemics keep teaching us, it’s this one: no country, however well-resourced, can fight a modern epidemic alone.
And the fight wasn’t only scientific. In many of the worst-hit communities, health workers first had to earn the trust of terrified people before they could even begin treating patients. Rumours moved faster than the virus itself. Some response teams were physically attacked because local communities genuinely believed the foreigners had brought the disease with them. The hardest part of the WHO’s job in West Africa wasn’t the epidemiology. It was convincing frightened people that the strangers in protective suits were there to help.
The legal backbone behind all of this is the International Health Regulations of 2005, a binding agreement signed by 196 countries. Under it, nations commit to building up their surveillance systems and reporting major public-health events as they happen. Again, the WHO can’t punish anyone who breaks that promise. What keeps the system running instead is something closer to mutual self-interest dressed up as trust. A doctor in a rural Ugandan clinic notices something strange, sends word within hours, and by nightfall a hospital in Hanoi has been quietly put on alert. The virus doesn’t carry a passport. There’s no reason our warning system should need one either.
But here’s the catch, and it’s the catch that runs through this entire essay: a bridge held together by nothing but goodwill is a bridge that can be burned down whenever goodwill runs out.
Where the Bridge Catches Fire
Smallpox showed the world what the WHO could accomplish when politics got out of the way. COVID-19 showed what happens the moment politics decides not to.
In January 2020, as strange pneumonia cases began surfacing out of Wuhan, the WHO started issuing technical guidance almost immediately. Within weeks, labs in different countries were sharing genetic sequences fast enough that diagnostic tests and, eventually, vaccines could be built at a speed the world had never seen before. And yet while the scientists raced ahead, plenty of governments dragged their feet — distracted by elections, economies, closed borders, and their own domestic politics. The WHO somehow ended up being blamed for moving too slowly and too fast, sometimes in the same week.
Underneath the noise was a deeper problem. Taiwan, despite running one of the strongest public-health systems in Asia, remains locked out of WHO membership because of a geopolitical dispute that has nothing to do with public health at all. Some argue every capable health authority should be included during an emergency, full stop. Others insist diplomatic realities can’t just be waved away. Whichever side you land on, the episode makes one thing painfully clear: politics can jam the gears of information-sharing at exactly the moment speed is what saves lives.
Then there’s money, which is its own kind of vulnerability. Unlike a lot of international bodies, the WHO gets only a small slice of its budget from mandatory dues paid by member states. Most of its funding comes in voluntarily, and it usually arrives with strings attached — earmarked for one specific programme instead of left for the organisation to spend where it judges the need is greatest. That raises an uncomfortable question that never really goes away: how independent can an institution be when its biggest donors are also, in effect, setting its agenda? Whoever writes the cheque tends to have a say in what it’s spent on.
This isn’t some accidental design flaw — it’s baked into the structure. An organisation that’s expected to stay scientifically neutral is, at the very same time, financially dependent on the political goodwill of the countries and donors funding it. Very few institutions are asked to hold that particular contradiction together.
If there’s one uncomfortable truth the pandemic forced into the open, it’s this: agreeing on the science does not mean agreeing on what to do about it. Vaccines turned into symbols of national pride. Medical supplies became bargaining chips in diplomacy. Export bans, unequal access, and countries quietly looking out for themselves all slowed down a response that needed the opposite — solidarity, at the exact moment solidarity mattered most. The WHO kept publishing its guidance. It ran the Solidarity Trial. It backed COVAX in an attempt to get vaccines to countries that couldn’t outbid wealthier ones. But it couldn’t force a single nation to share its stockpile, and it couldn’t make a single leader tell the truth.
That’s the danger sitting underneath normative power. It works beautifully — right up until someone decides the norms simply don’t apply to them anymore.
The Victories Nobody Celebrates
We remember wars that were won and elections that were fought hard. We almost never remember the disasters that quietly never happened. And that’s precisely the problem with judging the WHO — its biggest achievements are measured by absence, not by anything anyone can point to.
Eradicating smallpox remains the only time humanity has deliberately wiped a human disease off the face of the earth. It wasn’t the work of one powerful country. It was a coalition. William Foege pioneered the surveillance-and-ring-vaccination strategy in Nigeria back in 1966. Donald Henderson ran the eradication campaign out of Geneva. Karel Raška, a Czech epidemiologist, helped establish surveillance as a foundational idea in modern public health, nudging the whole campaign away from blanket vaccination and toward something smarter and more targeted. Countries that agreed on almost nothing else during the Cold War — different ideologies, different continents, open hostility toward one another — found common ground around a single idea: no child should die of something we already know how to prevent. In 1980, the World Health Assembly made it official. A virus that had killed half a billion people was gone for good.
The strategy worked because it replaced guesswork with surveillance. Rather than trying to vaccinate literally everyone on the planet, teams tracked down each new outbreak as it appeared, isolated the affected community, ring-vaccinated everyone around it, and cut the chain of transmission village by village. It’s still considered one of the smartest strategic moves in the history of public health.
Since the Global Polio Eradication Initiative launched in 1988 — a joint effort involving UNICEF, Rotary International, the CDC, and later the Gates Foundation — wild poliovirus cases have dropped by more than 99 percent. Millions of children are walking today because health workers crossed mountains, war zones, and flooded roads to reach villages that most maps had simply forgotten existed.
Plenty of vaccinators paid a heavy price for that work. Some kept going even through active conflict and real danger, convinced that protecting a child from lifelong paralysis was worth risks that almost nobody outside the world of global health would ever hear about.
None of this is limited to infectious disease, either. The Essential Medicines List, first published in 1977, names the medicines the WHO considers indispensable for meeting basic health needs. In many low-income countries, this single list quietly shapes procurement decisions that determine, in a very real sense, who lives and who doesn’t. The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, adopted in 2003, took what used to be a patchwork of national tobacco policies and turned it into something closer to a coordinated global movement — stronger warning labels, tighter advertising restrictions, and a shared standard that spread across much of the world.
Most of these wins never make front-page news, because prevention, by its nature, is invisible. A pandemic that never crosses a border doesn’t produce a single dramatic photograph. A child who never gets infected doesn’t become a headline. A disease caught early through quiet surveillance work rarely captures anyone’s imagination. In a strange way, the better the WHO does its job, the less anyone notices it’s doing anything at all. Its greatest achievements are the crises that simply never got the chance to happen.
But that invisibility cuts both ways. An institution whose entire value lies in catastrophes it prevented is an institution that will always struggle to justify its own budget. When a politician asks why taxpayers should keep funding “a bridge with no army,” the honest answer — because you can’t see the fire it already put out — has never once won an election.
The Next Virus Will Not Wait
Whatever threatens global health next probably won’t look much like what threatened it before. Climate change is already redrawing the map of disease, pushing dengue- and malaria-carrying mosquitoes into regions where people have no natural immunity to either. Antimicrobial resistance threatens to drag modern medicine backward, back toward a world where infections we thought we’d already beaten become dangerous again. Artificial intelligence is set to transform drug discovery — but its benefits are landing unevenly, favouring countries that already have the infrastructure to use it while leaving everyone else further behind.
And these threats probably won’t arrive politely, one at a time. Climate change could intensify vector-borne disease at the same moment antimicrobial resistance is quietly undermining our existing treatments, while AI reshapes how healthcare gets delivered in the background. The WHO’s real test in the years ahead won’t be handling one crisis after another — it’ll be handling several that overlap and collide at once.
These aren’t just tests of laboratory capacity or funding. They’re tests of whether we actually absorbed the lesson smallpox taught us decades ago: no single nation can solve a disease problem alone, because disease has never once cared about the lines we draw on maps.
The next pathogen won’t check anyone’s GDP before it boards a flight. It won’t ask which country is strongest or richest or most influential. It will only ask one question, and it’s the same question it’s always asked: whether the bridge between Geneva and that one village clinic is still standing.
History has a habit of forgetting the institutions that quietly stopped disasters from happening. It only remembers the disasters that prevention failed to catch. That’s the strange paradox at the heart of global health — success gets measured in what didn’t happen, not in monuments anyone builds afterward.
The WHO is far from perfect. It has made real mistakes, drawn real criticism, and operated for decades under political pressure and financial limits that constrain what it can actually do. But judging it purely by its failures misses something more important. Every single day, thousands of scientists, epidemiologists, doctors, and public-health workers move quietly through its networks, preventing crises that most of us will simply never know were spared.
The people who founded the WHO believed health could become humanity’s first truly shared responsibility. More than seventy-five years on, that vision still isn’t finished. Maybe it never will be. But the alternative — burning the bridge down because it was never built like a fortress — is a choice history has already shown us leads somewhere far worse.
The WHO was never meant to be a fortress. It was built to be a bridge. Bridges are fragile by design. But history keeps proving the same point over and over: rebuilding a bridge after it collapses always costs more than simply maintaining it while it still stands.
By: Simnan Bashir
Write and Win: Participate in Creative writing Contest & International Essay Contest and win fabulous prizes.
About the Author
