The diplomatic strain between South Africa and the US is well-documented, currently defined by a series of aggressive US actions. These include the expulsion of ambassadors, public rebukes of President Cyril Ramaphosa, exclusion from G20 proceedings, and a looming review of SA’s eligibility for the African Growth and Opportunity Act (Agoa).
Many attribute this fallout to domestic lobbyists like AfriForum and Solidarity, or to the populist temperament of the Trump administration. However, credit may be misplaced here. While these groups stoke the fire, the fraying relationship transcends simple lobbying. Attributing the foreign policy of a superpower solely to marginal organisations ignores the broader strategic tensions at play.
Even the controversy surrounding the “Afrikaner genocide” narrative — with which President Donald Trump famously ambushed Ramaphosa in the Oval Office — is probably a symptom rather than the cause. With access to sophisticated intelligence, the US administration likely understands the nuance behind such claims. Yet, South Africa must acknowledge that slogans like “Kill the Boer” provide perfect sound-bite fodder for populist leaders.
Rather than blaming the observers, SA needs to better communicate the historical context of such chants while recognising how they serve as potent signals for those looking to justify diplomatic retaliation.
Points of friction
The real source of US frustration is probably rooted in South Africa’s exercise of sovereignty, which often runs counter to US global interests. These “intractable” issues include:
- Global alliances: SA’s membership in BRICS+ and its deepening ties with China, the primary rival for US hegemony.
- Controversial bilaterals: Diplomatic support for nations like Iran, Cuba, and Palestine, while diverging from US positions on Israel and Taiwan.
- Multilateral defiance: Voting patterns at the United Nations that frequently clash with US interests, most notably the 2023 International Court of Justice case accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.
- Nonalignment and Russia: SA’s refusal to condemn Russia in the Ukraine conflict, epitomised by the “Lady R” saga.
- Economic ideology: A preference for state-led developmental models and redress policies (like BBBEE) over US-style market capitalism.
A pattern beyond one presidency
The US is increasingly adopting an “enemy of my enemy” stance, as seen in the 25% tariffs imposed on nations trading with Iran. This suggests that the pressure on South Africa is not an isolated incident, but a warning to other nations.
Crucially, this tension did not begin — and will not end — with any single US president. The fire was already burning during the Obama administration (seen in the Omar al-Bashir saga) and continued through the Biden years (Lady R).
Focusing on “villains” like Trump or AfriForum is a distraction. South Africa finds itself between a rock and a hard place: it must defend its autonomy while navigating a global landscape where its sovereign choices carry increasingly heavy costs. DM
Abel Sithole holds a master’s degree in International Relations from Stellenbosch University as well as a master’s degree in Business Administration and Futures Studies. He has extensive experience in financial services in the public and private sectors, policy and regulatory supervision, and academia.