OPINION:
On the sidelines of last month’s World Economic Forum, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa casually declared he is “not worried” about his country’s relationship with the United States. Yet on Sunday, less than two weeks later, President Trump declared that he “will be cutting off all future funding to South Africa.”
In no uncertain terms, Pretoria’s ties with Washington are on dangerously thin ice and could quickly deteriorate if Mr. Ramaphosa’s party, the African National Congress, remains wedded to advancing controversial land expropriation reforms and to warming relations with Russia, China, Iran and Hamas.
The Biden administration was mainly prepared to look the other way at South Africa, but Mr. Trump and his advisers have signaled that they may not be so lenient. Mr. Trump’s ire is a direct response to South Africa’s new land expropriation law, which allows the state to confiscate property without compensation. Beyond land reform, those Mr. Trump has tapped for key roles in his Cabinet — including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and United Nations Ambassador-designate Elise Stefanik — have openly criticized South Africa over the past year for siding with America’s adversaries.
While serving in Congress, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, supported legislation that called for a “comprehensive review” of the U.S.-South Africa relationship and criticized the country’s direction under Mr. Ramaphosa’s ANC for taking steps that were “inconsistent with its publicly stated policy of nonalignment in international affairs.” Moreover, Joe Foltz, a key adviser to that bill’s author, Rep. John James, Michigan Republican, is reportedly the top choice to lead the Africa desk in Mr. Trump’s National Security Council.
Meanwhile, influential lawmakers — notably Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim Risch, Idaho Democrat — have cast doubt on South Africa’s continued eligibility for the African Growth and Opportunity Act, a critical trade program set for reauthorization this year.
For a country to benefit from AGOA’s extensive duty-free trade provisions, the president must first determine its actions do not undermine U.S. national security or foreign policy interests. Yet under ANC leadership, South Africa has welcomed senior Hamas officials, hosted Russian and Chinese naval warships, launched a legal crusade against Israel and actively promoted the anti-Western BRICS framework.
A clash between South Africa and the United States could not come at a worse time for Pretoria, which holds the Group of 20 presidency this year. Mr. Ramaphosa may hope to capitalize on the global spotlight to burnish his credentials, but that glare will highlight South Africa’s troubling shift away from the West and growing crises at home. Notably, the country’s economy grew by a mere 1.3% last year, and youth unemployment is reaching 50%, the fourth highest in the world.
The Trump administration has demonstrated its willingness to pause U.S. foreign assistance, and the hundreds of millions of dollars in American aid sent to South Africa annually is now directly in the president’s crosshairs. Further alignment with America’s adversaries could trigger even more swift and profoundly consequential changes capable of pushing South Africa under the ANC into pariah status. For a nation plagued by entrenched corruption, soaring unemployment and an economy desperate for foreign investment, the ANC appears to be doing more to jeopardize South Africa’s relationship with the United States than repair it.
Mr. Ramaphosa cannot afford to underestimate the speed and force with which a Trump administration may respond if it concludes American interests are at risk.
South Africa’s economic growth, political stability and international standing are at a tipping point, but Pretoria shouldn’t look to America’s adversaries for support. Now is the time for urgent recalibration, not complacency. South Africa should break ties with BRICS, cease its anti-Israel lawfare, and pivot back to the West by aggressively fighting corruption and promoting democratic, market-oriented reforms at home. Left unchecked, Mr. Ramaphosa’s dismissive approach could leave South Africa wishing it had worried far sooner and more seriously.
• Max Meizlish is a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. You can follow him on X @maxmeizlish.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.