For Donald Trump, South Africa is DEI in the form of a country
One of the first things Donald Trump did on retaking office was to halt America’s programme to settle refugees. That is bad news for Africans who might want to flee war or oppression. But the White House is making an exception for a group of white Africans: the roughly 2.5m South Africans of mostly Dutch, French and German descent known as Afrikaners. On February 7th Mr Trump issued an executive order that stopped aid to South Africa, citing the country’s “aggressive” posture towards America, and pledged to admit “Afrikaner refugees” fleeing ostensible persecution by their government.
Even if this is a genuine offer, there is unlikely to be an exodus. Contrary to what Mr Trump suggests, Afrikaners—or any of the 63m South Africans—are not experiencing Zimbabwe-style land seizures. They also feel deeply rooted in their homeland. “Africa is in our blood,” explains Theo de Jager, a farmer, in an open letter declining the American president’s offer.
But the order is still significant. It symbolises how after 30 years of giving South Africa the benefit of the doubt, America is now doubting the benefits of its ties to the “rainbow nation”. The African National Congress (ANC), in power since the end of white rule in 1994, failed to see that its questionable friendships abroad and the economically harmful laws passed in the name of racial redress at home might eventually incur a cost.
The order also reflects the success that some Afrikaner groups have had in promoting their agenda in America, especially among MAGA Republicans. And it shows how Mr Trump will punish countries for both their foreign and domestic policies. The latter makes South Africa especially vulnerable because, for those of a Trumpian persuasion, South Africa is “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI) in the form of a sovereign state.
Under the ANC South Africa has had a history of welcoming American aid and investment while being friendly with America’s adversaries. The ANC has long stood accused of accepting donations from countries that are hostile to the West, including China.
When geopolitics was more placid, that was merely irksome. But in recent years Washington has woken up to South Africa’s antipathy to Israel and its ties to China, Russia and Iran. Michael Waltz, Mr Trump’s national security adviser, was one of the congressmen leading calls for a review of relations between America and South Africa, partly because South Africa brought a case of alleged genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). As a senator Marco Rubio, now secretary of state, criticised South Africa for acceding to China’s demands that Taiwan should move its representative office away from Pretoria, the capital. He says he will not attend a meeting of G20 foreign ministers this month in Johannesburg.
But South Africa’s alleged sins go beyond international relations. Joel Pollak, a South-African-born editor at Breitbart, a right-wing media outlet, and potentially America’s next ambassador to the country, has connected Mr Trump’s opposition to DEI policies in America with the president’s approach to South Africa. “[W]hen you look at the political debate in South Africa, it’s very much about redressing the past…And the world is tired of it,” he told News 24, a South African outlet.
One policy that has provoked ire is Black Economic Empowerment (BEE), which among other things can require firms investing in South Africa to give equity stakes to black-owned businesses. The policy was sold as a way to help correct centuries of systemic racism. In reality it has enriched a black elite while raising the costs of doing business. Elon Musk, whose attempt to bring Starlink internet to his home country has been hampered by BEE requirements, has accused South Africa of having “openly racist ownership laws”.
Another area identified by Mr Trump is property rights. In a move that America’s president seems to have conflated with actual land seizures, on January 23rd Cyril Ramaphosa, his South African counterpart, signed the Expropriation Act, which gives the state new powers to expropriate property in the “public interest”.
Those close to the president argue it is a modest reform that will be used to streamline infrastructure projects. To its critics, including groups representing Afrikaners, the law will make it easier for the government to confiscate your property on the pretext of righting historical wrongs.
To Afrikaner groups the law adds to a sense that they are under siege. It is a message they have taken to America on lobbying trips, where they have also highlighted cases of murdered farmers. Though these ought to be seen against the backdrop of widespread violent crime across South Africa, nuance is usually lost by the time the subject is aired on American right-wing media. In conspiratorial quarters of the far right such cases are taken as evidence of a deliberate “white genocide” (a claim that has no basis in reality).
Mr Ramaphosa has said that South Africa “will not be bullied”. But he is preparing to send a team of envoys to Washington. A potential olive branch under discussion is amending the law to allow satellite services such as Mr Musk’s Starlink to operate without having to hand over equity in their local operations. The Democratic Alliance (DA), a liberal party that is the ANC’s key coalition partner in government‚ has been calling for a change in the policy since before Mr Trump won re-election.
Broad concessions are unlikely, however. Mr Ramaphosa’s allies say he is unlikely to drop its case at the ICJ. Nor will there be any rethinking of the wisdom of BEE. If the Expropriation Act is revisited, it will be as a result of court challenges rather than Mr Trump’s demands. Many in the ANC will be tempted to deepen their relationships with other BRICS countries.
Yet shrugging off the potential effects of Mr Trump’s punitive actions is naive. South Africa, which has more people living with HIV than any other country, receives around $440m—17% of the government’s budget for combating HIV and TB—in annual American aid to tackle the virus. Under a Trump administration South Africa’s participation in AGOA, legislation that grants African countries tariff-free access to America for certain exports, is under threat. Mr Trump is unlikely to champion South Africa’s exit from the grey list of countries seen as not doing enough to combat money-laundering. And it is hard to imagine a Trump-appointed ambassador promoting South Africa as an investment destination for American businesses.
Mr Trump’s mendacious interventions will not benefit South Africa. They will amplify extremist voices, both black and white. They could lead to further hardship among the poorest. And yet the rational response by the ANC would be to see the current fracas as something of a wake-up call. For while Donald Trump has told some lies about South Africa, he has hit on some truths, too. ■
Sign up to the Analysing Africa, a weekly newsletter that keeps you in the loop about the world’s youngest—and least understood—continent.