On Thursday night President Cyril Ramaphosa gave one of his best speeches in a long time. The 2025 state of the nation address was not remarkable for its big numbers; it stood out for its relevance.
Amid US President Donald Trump's threats to cut aid to SA, Ramaphosa opted to lead his country like a real commander-in-chief. At the start of his speech he told his audience that: “We are a resilient people. We will not be bullied. We will stand together as a united nation. We will speak with one voice in defence of our national interest, our sovereignty and our constitutional democracy.”
A week earlier Trump falsely claimed that certain classes (read: white South Africans) are being ill-treated and stripped of their land by the black-led government and, consequently, he would be cutting off all aid to SA while this is investigated.
Ordinarily, this should be welcome. Unfortunately, as the world has come to know, Trump has no respect for facts or evidence. After all, he is the one who claimed — falsely again — that foreigners were eating Americans’ pets during the campaign that propelled him to become America’s 47th president.
A simple desktop research would show that no land has been forcibly taken by the state from private owners. Most white South Africans continue to live well in SA despite 30 years of state-led efforts to improve the lot of their black counterparts.
Most governments, including in the US, have legal instruments for expropriating land in the public interest. The apartheid government had similar instruments, and for years post-apartheid administrations have used that law to advance the public interest.
Routine expropriation
State-owned enterprises (SOEs) and other organs of state routinely expropriated land for public development. Law courts were the final arbiters, but in eight of 10 cases these transactions have been amicably concluded.
After its elective conference in 2017, the ANC resolved to change the constitution, which has been amended numerous times since 1996, to allow for expropriation without compensation. This was largely a sop to the left to stop its electoral losses.
For two years, parliament ran public hearings to canvas views on amending section 25 of the constitution, which covers property rights. Unsurprisingly, this caused anxiety, and it was just as unsurprising that the bill fell through. The bill Ramaphosa signed into law last month is not that bill, but like “nationalisation” the word “expropriation” has become a swearword.
The controversy that has ensued was largely self-inflicted and disingenuous. The ANC thought this would shore up the president’s credentials in his own party, which has been eating itself alive over his decision to form a government of national unity (GNU) including the DA ahead of the national general council this year.
The DA, also under internal pressure due to its participation in the GNU, cried foul, which fed straight into fearmongering by minority rights advocates such as AfriForum. A group of former white South Africans led by billionaire Elon Musk seized on this irrational panic and lobbied Trump to target SA.
Musk, now secretary of government efficiency in the Trump administration, left SA when he was young. Unlike his parents, he really has no experience of apartheid or the post-apartheid project. But that does not mean he is not without his gripes with the Ramaphosa administration. He wants to sell his electric vehicles to SA, and has been lobbying for Starlink to be licensed in the country. When he was reminded of SA’s BEE laws, he snapped and started badmouthing his native country.
So, what is Trump looking for, and how should SA respond? He is looking after the business interests of his billionaire friends.
Still, Musk alone does not fully explain Trump’s threats to SA. SA is the largest African economy. With its advanced economy, it is the biggest beneficiary of the African Growth & Opportunity Act (Agoa), a US unilateral law that allows thousands of African exports to enter the US duty-free and without quotas. This is the other clubbing stick Trump is using to whip SA into line. The law, which benefits SA’s commodity and motor industries, is due for review in months.
So, what is Trump looking for, and how should SA respond? He is looking after the business interests of his billionaire friends. It is now payback time — they scratched his back when he was campaigning for power, now it’s his turn to scratch theirs. Musk doesn’t need a government salary; he needs more billions in his account. The latter will come via his empire and new interests in foreign markets like SA.
Trump is a negotiator. He escalates so that he can de-escalate at an opportune time and strike a deal. Threats by his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, to boycott the G20 foreign ministers meeting in SA, and for Trump to snub the heads of state summit in November, is part of the escalation phase.
Powerful as it is, the US needs SA too. This is not only because China stands ready to fill the void US isolationism will leave. It’s also in America’s self-interest that it maintains cordial relations with SA.
Ramaphosa was correct to rally South Africans behind himself, and remind the US that SA will not be bullied. But his decision to assemble a team of envoys to explain SA’s foreign and domestic policies to the world is a panic move.
SA’s policies are clear, and SA’s new ambassador to the US, Ebrahim Rasool, is a capable diplomat. This is a time for a stiffened presidential spine.
• Dludlu, a former editor of The Sowetan, is CEO of the Small Business Institute.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.