Concessions and sanctions after Trump ambushes SA

Two controversial South African politicians may face sanctions by the US following the high-profile Oval Office meeting between an SA delegation, led by President Cyril Ramaphosa, and US President Donald Trump and his top officials. This follows an ambush by Trump with a screening of a video clip featuring opposition SA leaders Julius Malema and former President Jacob Zuma, both filmed singing provocative songs and calling for attacks against white people, which Trump believes, falsely, is fuelling 'genocide' against white people, especially Afrikaner farmers. In a Business Day analysis, Natasha Marrian writes that resetting the relationship between SA and the US could culminate in sanctions against Malema, the leader of the Economic Freedom Front (EFF) and uMkhonto weSizwe's (MKP) Zuma. 'The shift in the mood in the Oval Office last week as Trump asked his aides to dim the lights before showing a video to justify his assertion of genocide against white Afrikaners in SA was palpable, even across the globe as SA watched the drama unfold in real time. Malema and Zuma were the only two high-profile politicians in those videos, both singing provocative struggle songs – the song Kill the Boer was not deemed hate speech by the Equality Court and appeals against the ruling failed all the way to the Constitutional Court. Yet, in response to a question posed to Trump and Ramaphosa, Trump doubled down on his narrative of white Afrikaners under siege in SA. Ramaphosa sought to assure Trump that the politicians in the video were opposition party leaders, represented in Parliament, and that their views did not represent that of the government. Agriculture Minister and John Steenhuisen of the Democratic Alliance (DA), now part of the Government of National Unity (GNU), also spoke out in SA’s defence, candidly admitting that farm attacks were a reality, but also emphasising that the EFF and MK were fringe groups whose views were inconsistent with that of the GNU.

Marrian notes that it is useful that team SA did not seek to go into the struggle-related significance of the songs sung by both leaders in the video – this would have fuelled the fire Trump had already lit with his video and news archive package of (alleged) farm attacks, some of which have since been shown to be false,  presented to the SA delegation. It is entirely possible that Ramaphosa and his delegation could have in this meeting, and will in ongoing engagements, convince Trump that the narrative of an Afrikaner genocide in SA is false, she writes. When this happens, the Trump administration will have to ‘save face’, by holding accountable those perceived to be fuelling the fire of murders through singing provocative struggle songs,' 'she writes in the BD analysis. 'Malema and Zuma represent failed ANC factions, pushing the party to the extreme of the ideological spectrum – while they are now outside the governing party fold, there are groups in the ANC that continue to support their nationalist views. If there are no consequences for the SA Government, there may be consequences for the individual politicians Trump used in the video to illustrate his point.'

'Conservative lobby groups and think-tanks in the US such as the Hudson Institute have urged the Trump administration to use sanctions targeted at individuals to take action on SA’s perceived errant ways instead of punishing the country as a whole and all its 60m citizens. With Malema and Zuma used specifically to illustrate Trump’s point in his video on Thursday, it is likely that the pair could be the first to be targeted by such action. At a briefing on Thursday, Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana spoke candidly about the impact of being targeted by the US.' While he was speaking generally, on a macro level, the impact on individuals is more harrowing, stripping travel rights, heightened financial scrutiny and limited access to opportunities', states the BD. ‘Dealing with the Americans is a challenge because if you disagree with the Americans, life becomes difficult in dealing with everybody, because no-one wants to touch you, which is a fundamental problem,’ Godongwana said. 'It would tighten the net around an already isolated Malema and further complicate the networks inside and outside the ANC that continue to clandestinely support Zuma. Malema and Zuma have mastered the art of capitalising on victimhood – action against them by the US may mark the ultimate test of their resolve to continue doing so.'

See also Analysis below

Ramaphosa can take credit for his role for steering SA away from a full-blown race war in the 1990s, but he walked into a Trump trap in the Oval Office last week. Legalbrief reports that Ramaphosa’s efforts to promote the rainbow nation – and the fact that there is no genocide and no land has been seized by his government – failed. The Daily Maverick reports that there were grave concerns that Ramaphosa would be led into an ambush similar to the one Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy experienced earlier this year when Trump – and Vice President JD Vance – berated him over his handling of Russia’s invasion. And that is exactly what happened. The Citizen reports that the meeting started off with an extremely amicable discussion, but later descended into chaos and shifted to the topic of violence against white farmers. It came amid heightened tensions between the US and SA over claims by Trump and SA-born billionaire Elon Musk about the country’s racial equity laws, which prompted the US to recently admit white SA refugees while barring refugees from other countries.

The Citizen reports that Trump reiterated his concern over what he believes is a dire situation ‘and that’s the purpose of this meeting, and we have welcomed people who are being persecuted’. Ramaphosa rejected this, saying ‘it will take President Trump listening to the voices of South Africans’. ‘I’m not going to be repeating what I’m saying. If there was an Afrikaner genocide, these three men (businessman Anton Rupert, golf legend Ernie Els and DA politician John Steenhuisen) they would not be here’. When asked why he accepts refugees from SA and no other countries, Trump said there are ‘concerns’ about SA. ‘We do have a lot of people concerned with regards to SA, that’s the purpose of the meeting. We have many people who feel they are being persecuted… I must tell you, Mr President, we have had a tremendous number of people who are fleeing SA, and it’s a very sad thing to see.’ EWN reports that Steenhuisen and Rupert refuted Trump’s claims of a white genocide occurring in SA. Steenhuisen said the majority of farmers want to stay in SA rather than leave. The DA leader said the country has prioritised protecting white farmers, including preventing livestock theft. Ramaphosa clarified his position on Trump’s accusations, saying SA has a democracy that allows people to express themselves. ‘There is criminality in our country, and the people who get killed in SA are not only white people, but also include black people.’

To support his genocide assertion, Trump held up an image that he said was from SA and which he claimed showed some of those victims being buried, reports The New York Times. Reuters on Friday said the photos were actually of the conflict in eastern Congo. That was not the only false claim he made. During the encounter, Trump presented a stack of articles and blog posts as evidence of the persecution of white farmers in SA. One of the images Trump held up showed medical workers in white protective clothing lifting body bags. ‘Look, here’s burial sites all over the place. These are white farmers that are being buried.’ Reuters said the image was taken from its recent exclusive video report documenting the aftermath of fighting between Congolese troops and fighters from the M23 rebel group in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. The image was later published on the website of American Thinker, a conservative online magazine, with an article that captioned it only as a ‘YouTube screen grab.’ The White House did not respond to a query from Reuters about the image. On the Kill the Boer song, Malema has used the song repeatedly to rile up his audiences and roil his political enemies. Malema has held onto the song as part of his arsenal of incendiary comments to portray himself and his party as radical revolutionaries. AfriForum, a group that represents the interests of Afrikaners, took Malema to court in 2011 and 2022 seeking to block him from singing the song. Initially, a judge ruled that the song was hate speech, but Malema continued.

Then in 2022, a judge ruled that AfriForum had ‘failed to show that the lyrics in the songs could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to harm or incite to harm and propagate hatred’. Groups that claim Afrikaners are the victims of violent persecution in SA have seized on Malema’s comments and songs, even as his own party’s popularity dims. In SA, the English-language outlet News24 traced the video Trump played to a social media account known for spreading misinformation. The investigative report found that tech billionaire Elon Musk had reposted the same video at least twice on X, the social media platform he owns. Trump played footage of a memorial procession, which he falsely claimed was a burial site for more than 1 000 murdered white farmers. A New York Times analysis found that the footage showed a memorial procession for a white couple who had been killed on their farm that was held on 5 September 2020, near the town of Newcastle, in SA’s eastern KwaZulu-Natal Province. And the white crosses were installed as symbols and removed after the procession. They are frequently used by demonstrators who are often, but not always, farmers protesting what they say is police inaction around murders and crime in rural areas. These protests have, at times, been hijacked by groups peddling the idea that white farmers are the victims of targeted killings that they describe as a ‘white genocide in SA. Despite statistics debunking this myth, the idea has taken root among conspiratorial far right groups on the internet. It has also made its way to the White House, where it has shaped foreign policy and upended refugee norms after Trump offered expedited asylum to white Afrikaners.

Meanwhile, SA Communications & Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi has been accused of siding with SA-born Musk by proposing an amendment that would weaken a black empowerment policy in the digital communication sector. Legalbrief reports that Malatsi on Friday gazetted a policy directive on the role of equity equivalent investment programmes in the ICT sector ‘as a mechanism to accelerate broadband access’. It proposes an amendment to the government policy that required multinational companies to sell 30% or more of their stake to previously disadvantaged black people. The move has drawn sharp criticism from the ANC, with one senior leader describing it as ‘a win for the DA '. This was echoed by the EFF which said ‘we will not allow our laws to be rewritten in Washington’. However, Mlaatsi denied the directive was drafted to create a special regime for Musk and said the timing of its publication was coincidence.

The Sunday Tribune reports that Malatsi wants the Independent Communications Authority of SA (Icasa), which regulates the electronic communication space, to appease multinational companies by implementing ‘certain amendments to regulations promulgated by it to meet the imperatives of other national laws’. ‘The focus of this policy direction is on lowering regulatory hurdles to investment in reliable broadband and ensuring access to the Internet. This is in line with the Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment Codes of Good Practice, which recognise that the global nature of multinational corporations’ operations may constrain their ability to comply with equity ownership requirements,’ read his proposal. Interested people have been given 30 days from the date of the publication of the proposal to provide written comments for or against it.

The proposal was made two days after Ramaphosa and his team met Trump at the White House. Rupert urged Trump to assist SA with technology to fight crime and proposed that Starlink, which is owned by Musk, come to SA and be active in ‘every police station’. The Sunday Tribune notes that Malatsi said the amendment of section 9(2)(b) of the Electronic Communications Act, 2005, was necessary because multinational corporations are not keen on complying with equity ownership requirements. ‘Consequently, there is a need to harmonise the requirements and provisions of the Act with other legislation that applies to the recognition of ownership of members of the ICT sector, including the Amended Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) ICT Sector Code.’ It was reported that the government had previously rejected Musk’s attempt to launch Starlink’s branch in SA when he had refused to sell 30% or more of his shares to previously disadvantaged black people. Musk then accused the government of refusing his move because he was not black. Die Burger reports that committee chairperson Khusela Diko issued a statement over the weekend labelling the policy directive an apparent contravention of of the Electronic Communications Act and an attempt to benefit Starlink.