When sending an "ultimatum" to WHO last week, Trump seemed to expect his attacks could bring more impact than reality.

In a four-page letter, US President Donald Trump criticized General Director Tedros Adhanom Ghebryesus and the World Health Organization (WHO) on how to respond to the pandemic, claiming that they constantly make mistakes that make the world

"I cannot allow US taxpayers to continue to fund an organization that is clearly not serving US interests as it is now," Trump wrote in the letter, adding that his administration had contacted WHO about

Trump's "ultimatum" was sent in the context of WHO members attending an online meeting of the World Health Assembly (WHA), WHO's decision-making body, to promote international response.

However, General Director Tedros did not seem to be caught up in the spiral of controversy or being dissatisfied with the Trump statement as before.

Anne Gulland, the editor of the Telegraph, said that Tedros kept such calm attitude may be due to the "support" of China.

Beijing also immediately attacked, accusing the United States of using them as an excuse to evade financial obligations agreed by WHO member states.

A WHO member said the General Director Tedros' response will depend on the responses of the 194 member countries.

He added that Trump's anger only made the WHO member states more united.

Many commentators believe that it is difficult for Trump to achieve his goals by "venting" on the WHO.

"First, he wants to distract the public about his failure to deal with the epidemic in the US. He tries to blame China and the WHO, and turn this medical organization into a 'villain.'

While it is unclear whether China's commitment to contribute $ 2 billion will come true, Dr. Wenham believes that other countries will fill the financial gap for WHO, as well as the global health sector.

The United States has always been the largest contributor to the WHO budget, but only accounts for 15% of the total budget of this health organization.

The last time the US stopped contributing to the WHO budget was in the late '80s and its influence is much clearer now, says Dr. Sharifah Sekalala, an associate professor of law at the University of Warwick, UK.

"Today, WHO is in a much better position. They have had many new donors like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation with the second largest contribution budget, and many others. WHO is now not as vulnerable as it is.

The US withdrawal also foreshadows a major change at WHO, according to Dr. Yu Jie, who specializes in Chinese studies at the Chatham House Institute.

Another reason WHO is not too concerned about the US threat is China's position to grow as a science and technology power.

A study by the National Science Foundation in 2018 said the United States is still the world's largest research and development spending country, with about $ 500 billion a year, followed by China with nearly $ 400 billion.

"China will quickly catch up with the United States thanks to the huge financial resources invested in scientific innovation and the extremely strict talent selection process," Yu said.

Commentator Anne Gulland also said there were growing concerns about China's rise to scientific dominance.

Many people have questioned whether or not to rely on Chinese scientific works, but Dr. Yu thinks that all countries in the world are politicizing science to some degree.

"The US withdrawal of budget is a blow to WHO, but it is not an insurmountable difficulty. I don't think WHO will be too worried about this. They have more important things to do than focus.