Related Articles
–Editorial
A meeting between President Donald Trump and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa turned contentious on May 21 following questions from reporters about the U.S. decision to admit white South Africans as refugees.
What began as a routine diplomatic exchange quickly escalated when Trump repeated claims of a “genocide” against white South Africans, a statement strongly disputed by Ramaphosa and widely rejected by South African officials and international observers.
The exchange marks a new low in U.S.-South Africa relations, which have been strained in recent months following comments by Trump and tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, both of whom have accused the South African government of targeting white citizens through land reform policies and alleged racial discrimination.
During the Oval Office meeting, Trump played a video montage featuring controversial statements and news clips portraying violence against white farmers in South Africa. Ramaphosa responded by emphasizing that the individuals shown were members of fringe political parties and not representatives of government policy. South Africa’s Minister of Agriculture later clarified that the comments featured in the montage were not aligned with the country’s ruling coalition or official stance.
In response, the White House issued a statement defending Trump’s remarks. The statement described the video as evidence of the “shocking treatment” of white farmers and reiterated support for granting refugee status to white South Africans. It cited several media reports detailing violent attacks on farmers and controversial political rhetoric within South Africa, including chants such as “Kill the Boer,” which have sparked international backlash.
The controversy centers around South Africa’s recently enacted Expropriation Act 13 of 2024, which allows land to be taken without compensation in cases deemed “just and equitable and in the public interest.” Critics, including Trump, argue that the law unfairly targets white landowners, particularly those of Afrikaner descent. South African officials maintain that the law is a necessary step to address historical inequalities stemming from apartheid-era land ownership.
In a presidential executive order issued on Feb. 7, Trump outlined a policy to halt U.S. foreign aid to South Africa and prioritize the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees. The order directs federal agencies, including USAID, to suspend assistance and tasks the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security with developing a plan to admit Afrikaners fleeing alleged racial discrimination.
The order also cited South Africa’s recent foreign policy moves, including its accusations of genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice and closer ties with Iran — as justification for reevaluating U.S. engagement with the country.
The South African government has not yet formally responded to the executive order. However, political analysts warn that the move could deepen diplomatic rifts and complicate future cooperation between the two nations.
Human rights groups and international organizations have called for a more nuanced approach, urging both governments to avoid inflammatory rhetoric and work toward constructive dialogue on issues of race, land reform, and refugee policy.