Global economic leaders are convening in Washington this week for the spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund (I.M.F.) and the World Bank. The current U.S. landscape is markedly different from what it was during the previous meeting last fall.

Concerns regarding industrial policy and the possibility of a soft landing for the world economy have shifted to more pressing issues, such as President Trump’s trade war, renewed fears of inflation, and growing apprehensions about an impending global recession.

The multilateral institutions hosting these meetings, dependent on U.S. funding, are under significant pressure to demonstrate their relevance to the Trump administration, while also navigating potential confrontations that could lead to U.S. withdrawal from these organizations.

Eswar Prasad, a former China director at the I.M.F., commented on the current state of global governance, stating, “The post-World War II rules-based system of global governance, which the United States played a key role in fashioning, is crumbling before our eyes.”

He noted that the Trump administration has clearly expressed its dissatisfaction with various multilateral institutions, viewing their recommendations as misaligned with narrowly defined American interests.

The administration has enacted tariffs at their highest levels in over a century, resulting in widespread uncertainty in the global economy and likely disruptions to supply chains.

Concurrently, significant cuts to U.S. foreign aid are exerting additional pressure on poorer countries that have long depended on American support for essential resources such as food and medicine.

Since taking office in January, President Trump has remained relatively silent on the I.M.F. and the World Bank, although officials at these institutions are closely monitoring his disruptive impact on the global trading landscape, his rapid governmental reforms, and his restrictions on foreign nationals in the U.S.

Before Trump’s election, his conservative allies outlined a policy framework known as Project 2025, which proposed a U.S. withdrawal from the I.M.F. and the World Bank. Many Republicans have expressed reservations about these institutions’ emphasis on equity and climate change initiatives.

Mark Plant, a senior policy fellow at the Center for Global Development, mentioned that the I.M.F. is likely to maintain a low profile during the meetings as it waits for the Trump administration to review U.S. participation in multilateral organizations.

There are currently no clear indications as to the direction the U.S. will take.

While a withdrawal from the I.M.F. and World Bank is possible, it would be a complex process that could inadvertently enhance China’s influence within these institutions.

The I.M.F. may gain Trump’s attention this week by providing its first assessment of the effects of his tariff policies.

Last week, I.M.F. Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva indicated that Trump’s trade actions are negatively affecting the global economy, leading the I.M.F. to revise its growth forecasts downward and adjust its inflation projections upward.

In her remarks, she emphasized the fundamental nature of trade, stating, “Ultimately, trade is like water. When countries put up obstacles in the form of tariff and nontariff barriers, the flow diverts.”

The I.M.F.’s latest World Economic Outlook forecasts a slowdown in global output to 2.8 percent for this year, down from 3.3 percent in 2024, marking a reduction of half a percentage point from the fund’s January predictions.

The downgrade for this year is largely attributed to the impact of tariffs in the U.S., which is the world’s largest economy and was expected to lose momentum.

The I.M.F. projects U.S. output will slow to 1.8 percent in 2025, a decline from last year’s 2.8 percent. This forecast is nearly one full percentage point lower than the 2.7 percent growth that the I.M.F. had initially predicted for the United States in January, when it was considered the strongest economy globally.