Darlington Majonga
UNITED States President Donald Trump’s executive order halting aid to South Africa and directing US agencies to facilitate the resettlement of Afrikaaner refugees has deepened diplomatic tensions between Washington and Pretoria, raising significant concerns over economic stability and international relations.
The order, signed last Friday, cites concerns over South Africa’s policy of land expropriation without compensation and its recent geopolitical manoeuvres, including its genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice and its growing diplomatic ties with Iran.
Professor Theo Neethling, a political studies and governance expert at the University of the Free State, says the decision reflects mounting frustration within US foreign policy circles over South Africa’s global alignments.
“I think it is important to understand the background of the latest developments beforehand,” Neethling told The Free Stater.
“South Africa has been moving increasingly closer to the Global South and developing countries in its foreign policy since the Mbeki regime.
“As a result of this, South Africa was drawn into IBSA, a partnership between India, Brazil, and South Africa.
“An even more important development was the formation of BRIC, later BRICS, which included China and Russia.”
While South Africa has maintained economic ties with Western partners, its pivot towards China and other BRICS nations has fuelled anti-Western sentiment within the ruling African National Congress (ANC).
This has put Pretoria at odds with the United States, particularly under Trump’s administration, which prioritises strategic alliances over ideological considerations.
“The Biden administration has been frustrated with South Africa’s rapprochement with China, diplomacy with Iran – one of the US’s biggest adversaries – and continued refusal to condemn President Vladimir Putin for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine,” Neethling said.
“Trump has now made it very clear that he will not cooperate with countries whose foreign policies run counter to US strategic interests.
“From this perspective, Trump has now introduced wide-ranging punitive measures against South Africa.”
The suspension of US aid and potential trade penalties could have significant economic consequences for South Africa.
The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which provides duty-free access to US markets for eligible African countries, is particularly at risk.
“South Africa needs economic growth, and if the US excludes South Africa from AGOA, we will lose many thousands of jobs and suffer even more economically,” Neethling warned.
“South Africa will have to play a delicate and clever diplomatic game – and this will have to include all GNU parties.”
Neethling pointed to Kenya as an example of a country that has successfully balanced its ties between the West and BRICS members.
“Kenya, as the major economic power in eastern Africa, immediately tried to prevent its ties with the US from deteriorating when President Donald Trump took office,” he noted.
In addition to economic repercussions, the order exacerbates South Africa’s existing diplomatic challenges.
The Trump administration’s move underscores the urgency for Pretoria to recalibrate its foreign policy stance to avoid punitive measures from Washington.
“We must maintain and expand our BRICS ties because China is our largest trading partner,” Neethling said.
“But we must do so in a way that does not provoke the Trump administration into taking further action.”
He also suggested that Pretoria adopt a more nuanced stance on Israel, warning of the economic risks tied to its current position.
“On Israel, we will have to develop a softer stance – or pay a heavy price with AGOA and continue to flounder economically,” he cautioned.
The appointment of a competent diplomatic presence in Washington is seen as a critical step in preventing further deterioration of US-South Africa relations.
“Our ambassador in Washington DC has often been ill in recent years and could not do her job properly. This was a big mistake on the part of the South African government,” Neethling said.
“Afriforum noticed this weakness and simply filled the diplomatic vacuum by engaging conservative Republicans on their political concerns as South Africans.”
Neethling noted that the order aligns with Trump’s broader approach to international relations.
“Trump is clear that any country that acts against his strategic interests will not benefit from trade ties and humanitarian aid from the US,” he said.
“He has already threatened his own neighbouring states not to act against American strategic interests.
“The Trump stance therefore includes South Africa in a broad context.”
Trump’s directive to facilitate Afrikaner refugee resettlement has sparked widespread debate.
However, Neethling warns against assuming an immediate mass migration.
“I think it is an oversimplification to believe that all Afrikaners now have an open paved road to the USA,” he said.
“To migrate to another country, you need to have the knowledge and skills to have a middle-class life.
“In addition, the rand-dollar exchange rate is not very favourable for any South African to move to the USA.”
While Trump’s executive order may make immigration easier for some, Neethling stressed that economic realities will shape migration patterns.
“It is not the case that Afrikaners can now all simply get on a plane, land there and enjoy a middle-class life,” he said.
“However, Trump’s offer will make it easier for Afrikaners to immigrate to the USA – and there are already many highly skilled and qualified Afrikaners working or living there.”
As South Africa navigates the fallout from Trump’s decision, its leadership faces a critical test in managing international relations while safeguarding economic interests.
The challenge will be to reconcile its role within BRICS and the Global South with the necessity of maintaining stable trade and diplomatic ties with the world’s largest economy.
“The South African government will simply have to develop a more flexible and pragmatic policy,” Neethling advised.
“Otherwise, the economic and diplomatic consequences could be severe.”