Trump’s Expulsion of South Africa’s Ambassador May Well Backfire
Photo Credit: CODEPINK
The South African ambassador to the United States, Ebrahim Rasool, left Washington D.C. on March 21 after Secretary of State Marco Rubio took the extraordinary step of declaring him “persona non grata.” The United States is losing a seasoned representative who had previously served as South Africa’s ambassador under President Obama, was a member of South Africa’s National Assembly, and was active (and imprisoned) during his country’s anti-apartheid struggle. And ginning up the conflict with a country that has such tremendous international standing may prove to be a bad move for President Trump.
Secretary Rubio publicly berated Ambassador Rasool in a most undiplomatic tweet on March 14, writing: “South Africa's Ambassador to the United States is no longer welcome in our great country. Ebrahim Rasool is a race-baiting politician who hates America and hates @POTUS. We have nothing to discuss with him and so he is considered PERSONA NON GRATA.”
The Trump administration was incensed by remarks the ambassador had made earlier that week when speaking, via video, at a South Africa conference. He commented on the MAGA movement, saying that it is driven by white supremacy and is a response to the growing demographic diversity in the United States. The ambassador also expressed concern about the movement’s global reach, including support from Elon Musk, who was born in South Africa and has connections with extreme right movements overseas. The ambassador called his nation, South Africa, “the historical antidote to supremacism.”
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said the decision to expel Rasool was “regrettable” and that “South Africa remains committed to building a mutually beneficial relationship with the United States.”
Rasool’s expulsion is only the latest manifestation of U.S. displeasure with South Africa. On March 17, State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce listed a litany of issues the U.S. has with South Africa, including its “unjust land appropriations law”; its growing relationship with Russia and Iran; and the fact that it accused Israel of genocide in the International Court of Justice. Bruce denounced the ambassador’s lack of decorum, which she called obscene, and painted South Africa as a country whose policies make the United States and the entire world less safe.
This is in stark contrast to the view of South Africa from the Global South, where the African nation’s foreign policy is often seen as exemplary. Since the end of apartheid in 1994, the ruling African National Congress (ANC) has embraced a non-aligned foreign policy and has tried to resist pressure from Western countries. South Africa has also continued to show appreciation for nations such as Russia, Cuba and Iran that supported its anti-apartheid struggle.
South Africa’s non-aligned stance became a bone of contention with the Biden administration after Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The United States pushed the world community to condemn Russia, but South Africa, along with many African nations, refused to take sides. South Africa has long had warm relations with Russia, dating back to the days when the Soviet Union trained and supported many of the ANC freedom fighters. Instead of condemning Russia, South Africa led a group of six African nations to advocate for negotiations to end the Russia/Ukraine conflict.
But it was Israel’s war on Gaza that placed the United States and South Africa on a collision course. Far from supporting the U.S. ally, Israel, South Africa accused Israel of committing genocide against the Palestinians at the International Court of Justice. The Biden administration denounced the case as “meritless, counterproductive, and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever,” but the case triggered an avalanche of global support for South Africa’s principled stand. Dr. Haidar Eid, a Palestinian academic from Gaza, reflected world opinion when he said said, “By bravely standing up for what is right and taking Israel to the ICJ, South Africa showed us that another world is possible: a world where no state is above the law, most heinous crimes like genocide and apartheid are never accepted and the peoples of the world stand together shoulder to shoulder against injustice. Thank You, South Africa.”
When President Trump regained the White House, he not only condemned South Africa for its ICJ case against Israel, but he became embroiled in a policy totally internal to the African nation. Most likely egged on by Elon Musk, Trump denounced South Africa’s Expropriation Act of 2025, which established a program to expropriate unused agricultural land that White owners refused to sell to Black purchasers. White South Africans (Afrikaners) controlled the oppressive apartheid government until it was overthrown in 1994, and Afrikaners continue to own the vast majority of the wealth (the typical Black household owns 5 per cent of the wealth held by the typical White household). But Trump called the White population “racially disfavored landowners” and shockingly, not only punished South Africa by cutting off U.S. aid, but also promoted “the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees escaping government-sponsored race-based discrimination.” While shutting U.S. doors to immigrants of color from around the world, Trump laid out the red carpet for the white Africaners. Little wonder Ambassador Rasool was moved to call the Trump administration a leader in white supremacy.
Trump’s decision to cut aid to South Africa coincides with the administration’s gutting of US AID, which has had a disastrous effect on South Africans suffering from HIV/AIDS. The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) was a U.S. program launched in 2003 by President Bush to provide life-saving HIV care and treatment. South Africa has one of the highest rates of HIV in the world, and the U.S. had contributed 17 percent of the nation’s $400 million HIV budget. This funding supported the anti-retroviral medication for HIV treatment of 5.5 million people annually. According to some estimates, the aid freeze could cause over half a million deaths in South Africa over the next decade.
In terms of the larger South African economy and possible fallout from U.S. cuts, the United States is South Africa’s second-largest export market (China is number one), with $14.7 billion worth of goods exported to the United States in 2024. South Africa also benefits from the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), a preferential trade program providing duty-free access to U.S. markets. If the Trump administration removes South Africa from AGOA eligibility, its exports will surely plummet.
To make matters worse, this week the U.S. stopped the disbursement of $2.6 billion to South Africa through the World Bank’s Climate Investment Fund, monies that are supposed to help South Africa transition from coal to cleaner energy sources.
The Trump administration’s tough stance on South Africa is certainly meant to warn other countries about the consequences of challenging the United States. But Trump’s actions may well backfire. In response to the cut-off in aid and trade, 100 Parliamentarians from around the world penned a letter calling on their own governments to support South Africa’s public health programs and to expand new avenues for international trade as a sign of “international solidarity with the South African people as they face this assault on their right to self-determination.” South Africa is also a key player in the growing alliance of BRICs, a grouping of large countries trying to counter the economic clout of the United States. The BRICs nations now represent roughly 45 percent of the world’s populations and 35 percent of global GDP.
Trump’s expulsion and threats have also had a unifying effect inside South Africa. Ambassador Rasool, who says he has no regrets, is expected to be greeted by a massive crowd as he lands in Cape Town on Sunday. South Africa’s president is trying to tone down the reception, as he is anxious to repair relations with the U.S. But for the people of South Africa and worldwide who oppose white supremacy, Rasool is not a disgraced ambassador. He is a hero.
They (the US ruling elite) are trying since 2018 to assert and maintain their foreign control over South Africa’s mineral rich land and our African economy. That’s because South Africa like all African countries is either colonised or neo-colonised. We are controlled economically and therefore politically by foreign countries, usually western countries like the US, UK, France and other European countries.
This is not something young people from those countries are taught. They’re told colonialism ended in the 1900s, especially from the 1950s.
That’s a lie. It was always a lie. Colonialism had a makeover, called “rules-based order” subordination, which exists across the continent manifesting as —actual European colonies (referred to as “territories” or “provinces”),
—direct colonialism with the use of force like the military bases or current encampments in the Sahel region, and/or
—economic or indirect colonialism through the terms, conditions and processes of the global trade and financing system, masses of foreign aid to heavily control and influence political outcomes and direct economic control.
For example, South Africa’s central bank which is key to national economic policies and decisions has been and still is fully privately owned by a minority of white elites, including foreign elites (from the US, UK, France, Germany and Norway).
Yet again, not something children from these western countries are told.
And the reason for the ownership is colonial control. If you control the economic policies, you control the country and if you control the country then it’s easier to control the land (through privately held commercial property), the people and the minerals in the land.
Trump like all successive foreign government leaders in control of the global economy is lying (not with as much charm as an Obama) if he says, US actions against South Africa is about the upper-middle-to-upper-class, predominantly (but not exclusively) racialised white elites who privately own game reserves, golf estates and other private property estates, wine farms and/or massive rural land (many not used). The claim that private property ownership of any racialised white people is what he cares about is a fully blown lie.
This is about neo-colonialism and the imperialism (such as economic sanctions, pulling foreign aid and military intervention) needed to keep it in place all over Africa.
This is about a foreign country’s unreasonable entitlement to someone else’s land because that’s what global capitalism is, that’s how it works…through colonialism and the imperialism needed to keep it going. What’s happening to South Africa is because the socialist party, the Economic Freedom Fighters has called out the neo-colonialism as “economic apartheid”, where white elites (in our case, not only foreign but also domestic) own and control the land, the economy, the quality and trajectory of working class lives and on a continent that is rightfully theirs. In the same way, the Alliance of Sahel States (Mali, Niger and Burkino Faso) are facing massive foreign-steered attacks that included intel being sent by Ukraine to rebels. So who within peacekeeping NATO instructed war-torn Ukraine to provide intel to rebels in Mali in the midst of a war back home?
This is about colonialism, control over someone else’s land. It’s about Anglo-American mining interests and the like. And the domestic, often white corporate elites and black (and white) political elites, who work in cahoots with foreign countries to serve their individual interests at the expense of most of their country, including those who are working class and blonde and blue-eyed like my brother-in-law who is a fitter and turner.
Africa doesn't need USA or Europe fir anything. They can get much better deals from China,Russia and other Asian countries and South America. At least they won't be getting ripped off from their new allies