Can SA maintain its climate influence without its environment minister at COP30?

South Africa’s presence at COP30 in Belém has been overshadowed by internal political turbulence following the swift removal of Dion George as minister of forestry, fisheries and the environment. The dismissal, which occurred while George was leading the nation’s delegation in Brazil, forced an abrupt leadership change mid-negotiation. 

The DA’s Willie Aucamp will be sworn in on Monday, as a newly appointed member of the national executive, by President Cyril Ramaphosa. The change in executive comes after the DA leader John Steenhuisen formally requested Ramaphosa to implement this change to the DA’s representatives in the National Executive.

There is, and continues to be, speculation about the true reason for George’s removal and replacement with Aucamp, but the impact of Ramaphosa’s actioning of Steenhuisen’s request has triggered waves of confusion, miscommunication and embarrassment for South Africa at COP30. 

As the second and final week of the climate negotiations get under way today (Monday), this is where the negotiations are elevated to a ministerial level, replacing the work done by civil servants. 

This means a highly political and less-transparent phase of negotiations, and could risk the deletion of carefully negotiated draft texts; but it also usually creates an opportunity for more ambitious, high-level compromises to be reached. The COP presidency has, therefore, assigned ministers to lead the discussions on the key thematic areas.

Where does this leave South Africa? 

According to sources from the South African delegation, George left Brazil on Friday (14 November 2025) and with the new minister only being sworn in on Monday (17 November) insiders say it is unlikely that Aucamp will attend the COP since the negotiations are supposed to conclude on Friday. 

So, who will lead South Africa in this important week in Belém and what does it mean for the nation to not be represented by a head of state at this annual global forum? 

The short answer: our team of climate negotiators. As to the second part of that question, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment summed it up:

“Our negotiators are fully mandated and continue to represent the country’s interests across all relevant negotiation streams. South Africa’s position and mandate were established prior to COP30 and remain unchanged. Our team is actively participating in negotiations and engaging with partners to advance our climate priorities. We remain committed to the multilateral process and to ensuring that South Africa’s voice is heard in shaping global climate outcomes.”

Despite these assurances that South Africa’s mandate and negotiating team remain fully functional (of which there is truly no doubt), the political drama surrounding George’s dismissal has definitely cast a shadow over the delegation’s presence at COP30. 

To fully grasp the reputational risk and the void left by the abrupt leadership change, we need to consider the nation’s recent history and significant standing in these talks. Under George’s predecessor, South Africa evolved into a major international climate player, holding high-level, influential posts and spearheading key global initiatives. 

South Africa’s legacy at previous COPs

South Africa has become a major player at COP over the years, with former environment minister Barbara Creecy playing a significant role in the negotiations related to climate finance, Loss and Damage, adaptation, and the Just Transition.

For COP28 in the UAE, she and her Danish counterpart, Dan Jørgensen, were appointed by the COP28 presidency-designate to co-facilitate high-level political negotiations on the outcome of the Global Stocktake (GST) of the Paris Agreement. The goal was to guide the international community towards a successful, comprehensive and equitable outcome at COP28. 

The most contentious outcome of the GST was the language regarding fossil fuels, which Creecy welcomed. The final document included the objective of: “Transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.”

This was the first time that such explicit language had appeared in a COP decision. She said the phrasing aligned with South Africa’s national framework on Just Transition. 

Creecy was also instrumental in the launch of South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Investment Plan (JET-IP) during COP28 in 2022, making the country a concrete case study for large-scale, country-specific climate finance deals. This put South Africa at the forefront of the global conversation about financing the transition in developing nations.

In Egypt, she was appointed by the COP27 president to facilitate negotiations on mitigation and work programmes, which was a contested agenda item. Creecy also served as chair of the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment between 2019 and 2021.

These prominent roles at the COPs were important for South Africa’s representation, significantly elevating the country’s voice and influence in global climate negotiations, particularly regarding the need for a Just Transition and Climate Finance. Creecy was by no means a perfect environment minister, but COP is considered an arena where she shined and raised the country’s flag high during her time as minister. 

George, albeit quite new to the COP process and South Africa’s high standing at it when he attended his first COP as minister in Azerbaijan last year, was expected to continue Creecy’s legacy this year  – holding a senior, highly visible international post.

South Africa loses its co-chair of the Adaptation Stream

Before his removal George was co-chairing the negotiations for the Adaptation Stream at COP30, working alongside German State Secretary for Economic Cooperation and Development Jochen Flasbarth. 

Adaptation is considered central to protecting lives, livelihoods and ecosystems from the effects of climate change, and just a few days ago George stressed the importance of these talks for building resilience. 

“Adaptation is about building resilience. It is how we prepare for the storms, droughts and rising seas that are already reshaping our world,” he said.

The key priority in this role was advancing the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) through the Belém Work Programme. George previously said there was a need to agree on global indicators to measure tangible progress, warning that “without measurable results there can be no credibility”.

As Daily Maverick reported, one of the absolute priorities for South Africa, and Africa as a whole at this COP, is adaptation. South Africa was set to insist that the final agreement must incorporate around 100 progress indicators that explicitly measure the delivery of financial and other means of support needed to close gaps in adaptation efforts.

In the national stakeholder consultation on COP30 in October, George said: “We are already feeling the effects of a changing climate through extreme rainfall, flooding and unseasonal snowfall. Our adaptation goals focus on water and sanitation infrastructure, disaster risk management and climate-related health systems, food security, resilient human settlements, early warning systems, ecosystem restoration and capacity building across all spheres of government.”

Now after George’s removal, the COP30 presidency has announced new ministerial support for adaptation discussions. 

Gambia’s minister of environment, climate change and natural resources, Rohey John Manjang, will replace George and support discussions on adaptation, specifically concerning the indicators for the GGA.

Despite losing the country’s co-chair position, a high-ranking insider of South Africa’s COP delegation said they were happy to know that the co-chair of this important role will remain from Africa and that they know Manjang to be fully capable of delivering on the continent’s shared priorities. 

The question now is: is the lack of a head of state a blow to the continuity of South Africa’s climate diplomacy as a nation, and what does it mean to not have a head of state in this important negotiating week at COP?

Delegation status confirmed despite ministerial change

Despite the shock and the absence of a minister on the ground to lead the political engagement, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment clarified that the South African delegation’s legal negotiating capacity remains intact and that it will continue to work towards achieving its set-out priorities.

In response to concerns, including questions about a potential downgrade to “observer status”, the department confirmed that South Africa is not attending COP30 as an observer. The department asserted that the absence of a minister does not equate to a downgrade in the delegation’s status or negotiating capacity.

The department clarified that South Africa’s overall position and mandate were established before COP30 and remain unchanged. But there’s an undeniably significant capacity shift, which will be felt in the ministerial discussions this week, and the country does not have a full delegation without its minister or another head of state present, with the SA delegations already being reduced in size before the ministerial change. Negotiators were described as “fully mandated” and continue to represent the country’s interests across all relevant negotiation streams, actively participating in negotiations and engaging with partners through the current South African delegation at COP. 

Political motivations and reputational risk

While the delegation’s technical mandate remains solid, the political optics around the dismissal do bring new complexities and reputational risks.

South Africa's strength during COP processes is premised on our diplomatic reliability. But the recent, unexpected ministerial dismissal seriously undermines this standing. Such instability and visable fragility of our internal politics make the country look weak and risk-averse, significantly reducing its negotiating power.

Compounding this problem is the already delegation's limited capacity. Failing to have high-level representation at key decision-making forums like COP is a major risk, as it means the country's legal and beneficial interests are not being actively defended or promoted by the executive.

Read more: Environment Minister Dion George axed, despite ‘doing my job without fear, favour or prejudice’

DA leader Steenhuisen claimed that the change in executive was required to strengthen the party’s contribution to the Government of National Unity and advance an urgent reform agenda. He said it was “imperative” that the party’s executive roles are occupied by the most capable individuals who bring integrity, energy and excellence. 

Steenhuisen also stressed the importance of “collegiality” and ensuring every official works “to an agreed agenda”. Importantly, Steenhuisen explicitly denied that George’s removal was due to “external pressure and interests”.

Read more: Steenhuisen’s lion bone gambit — firing the one minister who finally took on the wildlife trade

News24 reported that George was fired because he publicly rejected South Africa’s official, Cabinet-approved policy to eventually permit the regulated trade of ivory and rhino horn. This act of defiance, made clear during a speech he delivered during the opening of COP30 in Brazil, was behind the political crisis since it directly contradicted the nation’s stance. 

Ultimately, this highly visible dispute over wildlife trade hastened his removal by the DA leadership.

However, George’s dismissal is viewed by some as having been driven by powerful private wildlife interests. George was not a perfect environment minister, but he was considered a progressive one who had taken meaningful stands against South Africa’s captive lion industry and the associated lion bone trade, having also defended the National Elephant Heritage Strategy. 

Read more: The sacking of Dion George — how a progressive minister is being taken down by the wildlife breeder

For South Africa’s climate delegation in Belém, the challenge now lies in maintaining momentum and asserting credibility in the face of sudden, politically charged leadership turnover, even as they continue to push for South Africa’s core climate priorities – including advancing the $1.3-trillion in climate finance agreed at COP29 and ensuring the Loss and Damage Fund supports the most vulnerable. DM

Kristin Engel is a freelance environmental journalist and a Danida Fellow participating in the Danida Fellowship Centre’s 2025 learning programme, “Reporting from the front line of the global climate crisis in an era of fake news”. The centre is a public self-governing institution under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark.