Ebrahim Rasool had to go.
Even before his 14 March comments to the Mapungubwe Institute, calling the Trump administration “supremacist” – leading to Secretary of State Marco Rubio declaring him persona non grata – several media outlets reported that South Africa’s ambassador to Washington had been almost completely frozen out by the Trump administration.
This is certainly not all his fault – any South African envoy is going to struggle in Washington these days – but given the precariousness of US-South Africa ties, he should have known enough to hold his tongue. Furthermore, this was a man representing the government best known for its emphasis on “quiet diplomacy”; perhaps he should have practised what Pretoria has so long preached.
Now, the hope in Pretoria has to be that Rasool’s ignominious departure will represent a low ebb of the bilateral relationship, but that is by no means a sure thing. In just two months since taking office, South Africa has been firmly in Donald Trump’s personal sights. From inviting Afrikaner “refugees” to settle in the US, to suspending aid over the signing of the Expropriation Act in January and Rubio announcing the US would boycott the G20 summit in November, Pretoria has faced unrelenting attacks, often from Trump’s personal X account. For those who have worked on South African issues inside and outside government in the US, this singular focus is extraordinary, since over the past two decades the country has never been more than a third-tier foreign policy priority in Washington.
As with the administration’s on again, off again tariff threats, how much of this is bluster and how much will translate into action remains to be seen. However, there are two grave threats – one immediate and one looming – that deserve Pretoria’s immediate and undivided attention. The first relates to funding to fight HIV provided by the US President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (Pepfar), originally put in place by George Bush in 2003 and implemented by the imperilled USAID. Pepfar funding amounts to more than $400-million per year, accounting for about 17% of South African spending to combat HIV. Already dozens of Pepfar clinics have been sent closure notices and thousands of staff laid off. Pretoria will struggle to make up this funding gap domestically, which is likely to lead to the deaths of tens if not hundreds of thousands of South Africans unable to access life-sustaining medication.
The second threat, coming in September, is a review of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (Agoa), a 25-year old trade deal that allows duty-free access to a wide range of goods from 32 African countries, including South Africa. In February, four Republican congressmen called for South Africa’s exclusion from Agoa over its ties to China and hostility towards Israel, in addition to the allegations of “human rights abuses” against Afrikaners. Whether the administration intends to follow through is anyone’s guess, but such a move would have a huge negative impact on South Africa’s economy. About $4-billion of the country’s $15-billion in exports to the US are covered under Agoa, while the government estimates nearly 100,000 jobs are linked to the trade deal.
Let’s now return to the matter of Rasool’s replacement, someone who, given the challenges above, would have to be a masochist of the highest order. First and foremost, it is important to emphasise that ambassadors are not policymakers; if the ANC wants to invite the Iranian ambassador to its headquarters – which happened last week – no one is calling the ambassador in Washington to see what he or she thinks. A new envoy in Washington will have to have thick skin and a cool head to defend Pretoria’s positions – the Expropriation Act, China, Russia, Cuba, etc – while avoiding the sort of outburst that sank Rasool. No one should expect a miracle worker.
However, the right person in Washington can make a difference with the right strategy, effective messaging and a lot of energy. Let’s start with aid and trade, which are the two potential catastrophes that need averting. Pepfar is a programme that has had significant bipartisan support for decades, and is arguably the most effective (and cost-effective) aid programme that has been put in place by a Western government. It has allies in the Republican party, and the new ambassador needs to find and mobilise them, making it clear that this is a true life-or-death matter.
A particular focus needs to be on the Christian caucus of the Republican party, people like House speaker Mike Johnson, who put a strong emphasis on faith. Call on him and others, get invited to Congressional prayer breakfasts, and make the plea that condemning people to die by withholding medication is not particularly “Christ-like”. Make them uncomfortable; American politicians tend to get queasy when they realise their actions kill innocent people. And thank them, as the Trump administration likes to be thanked for things. It will take a lot of ego swallowing, but restarting Pepfar is simply too important to not follow through.
Agoa will be a tougher nut to crack, but here South Africa has some leverage. While US exports to South Africa are only about a third of its imports, at roughly $5-billion, tariffs do work both ways. Maybe Washington blinks, maybe it doesn’t, but it is key for the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition to start assessing where it can retaliate. Also, it is vital to emphasise the opportunities in the mining space for US firms, such as the Phalaborwa Rare Earths Project which is receiving $50-million in financing from the US International Development Finance Corporation. Hence, any new ambassador should be clear and direct in telling US interlocutors – both government and private sector – that trade policy is a two-way street and that the long-term potential of cooperation is enormous.
So, who is the right person to helm the ship in Washington for the next four years? What characteristics do they need to have?
First, as noted above, this is not going to be a fun job, and frankly the only people who could do it effectively need it the least. So it will need to be someone with an incredible sense of duty and obligation to South Africa. Second, it needs to be a person who can speak the language of the Trump administration, which is business: a senior executive or entrepreneur would be ideal. No politicians, please. Third, the Trump administration values proximity, so someone who has a real relationship with President Cyril Ramaphosa, and can ring him if needed, is preferred.
Interestingly, with the exception of Pik Botha in the 1970s before he became foreign minister, South Africa’s ambassadors to Washington have always been fairly low wattage, but low wattage does not work with Trump.
Last, South Africa needs an effective communicator that will be selling the country daily, on TV and podcasts, at prayer breakfasts and business councils. One of the silver linings of the current situation is that South Africa is front-page US news for the first time since the 1990s; a new ambassador needs to take advantage of this and get as much media exposure as possible.
One last question: does the new ambassador need to be white, or more specifically a white man? It is an uncomfortable question, but one that needs to be taken into consideration given the makeup of the current US administration. The short answer is no, but it would be a mistake for the Presidency to exclude white male candidates from the position. Much of the vitriol against South Africa is driven by AfriForum, Elon Musk and their ilk, which have been shockingly effective in painting South Africa as a hellscape for white people. An effective white ambassador, particularly an Afrikaner, who can speak honestly and transparently to the real situation in the country, could prove to be a massive benefit, and maybe someone with whom Trump himself could develop a personal relationship (as long as he golfs).
Given all of that, who’s on the list? When wracking my brain about this, I started by going down the list of richest South Africans: Trump likes flash, so someone like Johann Rupert (a passionate golfer) would seem perfect. But I can’t see many of South Africa’s dollar billionaires having the patience or energy to deal with the demands of the job. The only possible exception is Patrice Motsepe, the richest black South African and the President’s brother-in-law to boot. But would he have the energy and drive to work a gruelling schedule to bring South Africa’s standing out of the doldrums? That is less clear.
The answer might lie in the impressive slate of South African CEOs in the banking, telecommunications, mining and media spheres: maybe not yet billionaires, but rich, accomplished and a bit younger and more energetic. There are a number of possibilities in this space, although some, in the prime of their careers, might hesitate to make such a move. However, one individual stands out: Sim Tshabalala, CEO of Standard Bank. Leading the African continent’s largest bank, Tshabalala would command respect not necessarily accorded to a politician, and he would be an effective voice for South Africa’s interests. Is it worth the pay cut? Only he can answer that. But he is just one of several business leaders that merit consideration.
Whatever direction Pretoria decides to go, it needs to move fast. Pepfar is a ticking time bomb, and the Agoa discussion is happening now. Only Ramaphosa can decide what kind of person he wants as the next ambassador, but it is my sincere hope he is giving it careful consideration. He needs to look far and wide, and think outside the box. One last possibility: an internationally known South African sportsman, businessman and philanthropist. He has lived in the US, but is a proud South African who has represented his country internationally. Oh, and someone with whom Trump would prioritise a regular five-hour meeting.
Would Ernie Els take the job? Personally I doubt it… but if I were Ramaphosa, I’d certainly be seeking his number. DM