EDITORIAL: G20 absence of the US is unwanted noise

It would be churlish to play down the US boycott of the G20 leaders’ summit later in November. The absence of the world’s largest economy from the Joburg meeting is unfortunate, and SA, as host, should continue trying to persuade Washington to participate in the event.

Failure to achieve that mission, however, will not doom a summit that retains the potential to be a seminal moment in global co-operation.

After months of mixed signals, Donald Trump, the US president, announced that no American government official will attend the summit. This is a significant about-turn from his initial position.

Up until now, the US government has participated in task forces of the G20. So has the US private sector.

While Trump made it clear from the get-go that he would personally not attend the heads of state summit, it was believed that he would send JD Vance, his deputy, to lead the US delegation.

Trump’s reasons for boycotting the event include his false claims that the SA government is systematically confiscating farms owned by Afrikaners and that a white genocide is under way.

The SA government has spent months trying to convince him that he has been misled. In May, President Cyril Ramaphosa led a high-powered delegation, including business leaders, to the White House in an attempt to restore relations with the US. A key part of the intervention was to invite Trump, who will host next year’s G20 summit, to attend the current summit and receive the handover of the G20 presidency.

Further private efforts have been expended to thaw relations.

Ramaphosa must understandably be disappointed at Trump’s snub.

The irony is that its absence from the G20 deprives the US government of an opportunity to learn about the issues it claims to worry about in SA. A great pity indeed.

The latest stance is inconsistent with facts on the ground. A recent US state department review of the SA economy gave a balanced and nuanced view of the country. As was reported by this newspaper, this review, authored by technocrats, made no reference to the so-called white genocide. Some of Trump’s allies have also told him he is relying on misinformation.

Critically, it is important to understand that the deterioration of relations between the US and SA is a government-to-government matter. It is not a falling out between the people of SA and those of the US, nor is it one between businesses of the two countries.

In the B20, the private sector version of the G20, US business leaders have actively participated. The recommendations handed over to the SA presidency were authored with US business participation in mind.

If Trump rejects them, he will also be rejecting the views of his private sector leaders.

Many South Africans remain grateful for the American support that ratcheted up near the end of apartheid. Without US sanctions, which was made federal policy in 1986, apartheid would have taken longer to end. The US Congress passed the sanctions law even though the Ronald Reagan administration still believed in its ineffectual constructive engagement policy with Pretoria.

Some would be relieved that Trump is not coming. His presence would have created a sideshow. His early departure at a Canada summit early this year is still fresh in people’s minds.

His and the US’s absence from the summit will make consensus — at least sufficient consensus — on the text of the leaders’ communique easier to reach. But this could be ditched by the incoming G20 presidency.

Ramaphosa’s worst fear — of handing the G20 presidency to an empty chair — is coming perilously close to fruition.

But this is not a disaster. Even though Trump believes SA is undeservedly in the G20 and may not invite the government to next year’s summit, SA has run a decent show. For this, the government needs to be commended, as should various sectors of society.

That said, a greater concern ought to be whether Trump will fatally undermine the G20 as he has done with other multilateral bodies.