President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order Feb. 7, “Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa,” which orders that “the United States shall not provide aid or assistance to South Africa” and will, at the same time, “promote the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees” in the United States, further described as “racially disfavored landowners,” who are ostensibly victims of “hateful rhetoric.”
What are the two “unjust and immoral practices” giving rise to this retaliation against this leading BRICS nation?
The first is an objection to South Africa’s recently enacted Expropriation Act 13 of 2024, enacted to address longstanding land inequities in the country left over from the days of apartheid. Whatever the merits or drawbacks of that South African law, it is a domestic issue for South Africans to sort out, and no business of the United States.
The second “unjust and immoral practice” cited, is that South Africa filed the suit before the International Court of Justice, which charged that Israel is carrying out genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza—the suit which saved the honor of humanity, and also was judged to have “merit.” Trump’s EO reads like it was plagiarized from the Biden-Blinken genocide team, down to its dripping pious hypocrisy. It asserts:
“South Africa has taken aggressive positions towards the United States and its allies, including accusing Israel, not Hamas, of genocide in the International Court of Justice, and reinvigorating its relations with Iran to develop commercial, military, and nuclear arrangements.
“The United States cannot support the government of South Africa’s commission of rights violations in its country or its undermining United States foreign policy, which poses national security threats to our Nation, our allies, our African partners, and our interests.”
The South African Foreign Ministry’s reply, issued today, is remarkably measured. It charges that “the foundational premise of this order lacks factual accuracy and fails to recognize South Africa’s profound and painful history of colonialism and apartheid. We are concerned by what seems to be a campaign of misinformation and propaganda aimed at misrepresenting our great nation. It is disappointing to observe that such narratives seem to have found favor among decision-makers in the United States of America.” The ministry reiterates that South Africa seeks a diplomatic resolution to this dispute, and does not reference the EO’s citation of the ICJ case.
The Foreign Ministry does, however, point out that “it is ironic that the executive order makes provision for refugee status in the U.S. for a group in South Africa that remains amongst the most economically privileged, while vulnerable people in the U.S. from other parts of the world are being deported and denied asylum despite real hardship.”
