When it was announced that South African President Cyric Ramaphosa was to visit the White House, there was speculation over whether Ramaphosa would have to cope with the kind of bombardment and mistreatment that Zelensky went through on his visit to the White House. Trump did not calculate that South Africa, unlike Ukraine, was a different ball game altogether.
Trump had planned to inflict, what the media had classified, as an impending ‘ambush’ on Ramaphosa on the deceitful allegations in some white racist circles about excessive black-on-white violence in South Africa. Trump accused Ramaphosa of permitting a genocide on the white people in South Africa. Elon Musk, himself white South African lineage, had probably choked his boss with exaggerated narratives of how white farmers were suffering targeted violence in thousands. They invented audio-visuals of graves where thousands of white farmers had been buried. For effect, Trump got the lights in the room dimmed. Clearly this was a techno-deception of the truth. For, if this were even remotely close to the truth, the world would have known more than less about it. Ramaphosa evenly listened and watched the audio and plainly said he had never heard of this and would check out. He was no more than casual about it and displayed no sense of disquiet.
Elon Musk and Trump obviously wanted to put Ramaphosa in the dock for having launched war-crimes proceedings against Israel for war crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC had issued arrest warrants to Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant. If this was about revenge, Trump, Musk, and Rubio picked the wrong partner to spar with. They looked blank for most part except at the start when they thought Trump could win any political battle. In the conversations that took place, Ramaphosa outmanoeuvred Trump lock, stock, and barrel, and exposed himself as someone devoid of even rudimentary political awareness. This must serve as a lesson to Trump’s political arrogance and imperialistic outlook that suggests he is licensed to be King and Judge.
Ramaphosa, no political novice by even the slightest stretch of assessment, put on display a robust contest against a Trump who, like in the movies, is the star who is eternal winner. It would have been useful for the White House honchos to research just who Ramaphosa. Ramaphosa’s role in in the struggle to end apartheid in South Africa begun in student politics at where his political activism led to his detention in 1974. In fact, Ramaphosa’s involvement in the trade union movement was instrumental in combating apartheid. He founded the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), a powerful force in fighting for workers’ rights and better working conditions. Under his leadership, NUM’s membership grew from 6,000 in 1982 to 300,000 in 1992, making it one of the largest and most influential trade unions in South Africa. Fearless in his pursuit of justice and equality he shouldered a three-week strike which resulted in significant gains for workers, including improved wages and working conditions. In 1987, he was a key figure in the Mass Democratic Movement, which preceded the unbanning of the African National Congress (ANC). In 1991, he was elected secretary-general of the ANC and played a crucial role in the party’s negotiations with the apartheid government to transition to democracy. Today, Ramaphosa is the President of South Africa, and his commitment to fighting for justice and equality remains unwavering. In his recent address to the UN General Assembly, he had uncompromisingly underscored the importance of international solidarity in the struggle against apartheid and called for collective action to address ongoing global challenges. By contrast, Trump showed he was a real novice and a vulnerable to his team of advisors who made him look like a lame duck in a battle-field with ammunition.
How did the White House trio of Trump-Vance-Rubio (with Musk lurking in the background) come up with the barren idea they would corner Ramaphosa and hand him a knock-out blow with a room full of American media? Trump embarrassed himself. Ramaphosa knew his grounds while his interrogators(!) knew little more than nothing. Ramaphosa proceeded to get down to business. He reminded Trump that his was a nation rich in critical minerals and wished a mutual investment affiliation in the USA based on their rich natural resources. Ramaphosa sought to create a dialogical platform reminding Trump that South Africa was supporting Ukraine. He stressed his wish to ‘recalibrate’ US-SA relations. In a diplomatic gesture, he expressed appreciation to Trump for sending respirators to his country during the pandemic. As an informal, but personal gesture, the South African team gifted the President a large book about golf knowing Trump’s affinity for the game.
Trump, J.D. Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had a single agenda on their minds. A reporter obliged asking what it would take for Trump to ‘be convinced that there is no white genocide in South Africa’. Ramaphosa retorted with a simple: ‘It will take President Trump listening to the voices of South Africans, some of whom are good friends like those that are here. Ramaphosa hit back firm, but diplomatic: ‘If there was Afrikaner farmer genocide in South Africa, I can bet you: these three gentlemen would not be here, including the minister for agriculture,’ among who was South Africa’s Agriculture Minister, John Steenhuisen and others.
When Trump ‘dimmed the lights’ to play a video montage showing Julius Malema, the communist leader of the opposition – the Economic Freedom Fighters – and others firing up large crowds through violent incantations against white South Africans. Trump called out an explicitly false invention and told Ramaphosa: ‘These are burial sites. Trump’s estimate was that there were a thousand of them. Trump shed a couple of unseen crocodile tears: “They’re all white farmers. It’s a terrible sight. I’ve never seen anything like it.’
Unperturbed Ramaphosa asked: ‘Have they told you where that is, Mr President?’. ‘I’d like to know where that is, because this I have never seen.’ An informed and arrogant Trump conveyed to Ramaphosa said: ‘It’s in South Africa’ unemotionally. Trump had dirtied his image in presence of those around him. It turns out that the footage was not in fact a cemetery but a symbolic protest from white farmers following the murder of Glen and Vida Rafferty. Trump stubbornly proceeded to carry his fiction further. He displayed printouts about violence against white South Africans: ‘Death, death, death, horrible death, I don’t know.’ Trump looked even more irrational when fact-checkers exposed the lie. The image was that of a woman being murdered in the Congo. ‘That is not government policy,’ Ramaphosa asserted. ‘They’re a small minority. There is criminality in our country.’ A long exchange followed and included an intervention by a white South African billionaire Johann Rupert, who instantly punctured Trump’s claims about ‘white genocide’. Trump had lost his marbles and the game. Ramaphosa, unyielding though polite. He stayed the course of his preferred “rational” approach to diplomacy. Ramaphosa’s objective was clear: preserve strategic partnerships, de-escalate political narratives, and advocate continued US support in areas of trade, security cooperation and global diplomacy.
Ramaphosa then had a tense but also somewhat light-hearted meeting with US President Donald Trump. When Trump got defensive about a question on the Pentagon’s decision to accept a Boeing 747 jet from Qatar, Ramaphosa intervened with humor, saying “I’m sorry we don’t have a plane to give you”. Ramaphosa switched to a more business-like demeanour to address Trump’s concerns about the treatment of white farmers in South Africa. He emphasized the importance of respectful dialogue and highlighted Nelson Mandela’s approach to resolving problems through discussion. Ramaphosa also firmly rejected Trump’s claims of a “genocide” against white farmers and dismissed the Trumps – a gesture that tantamount to the video being falsehood and nothing less or more. Chapter closed without tantrums from either Trump or his VP or Secretary of State and Defense Minister. Despite the tense moments, Ramaphosa expressed optimism about the meeting, stating that he expected Trump to attend the G20 summit in Johannesburg in November.
There are lessons for similar conversations between the USA and countries especially of the Global South. In the Trump-Ramaphosa dialogue, Trump’s stuck to his genocide claim. Ramaphosa’s held his fort. He simply did not surrender but he did not allow a confrontation. The lesson is that the powerful West should not dictate to the Global South. A good example is the way in which the USA and South Africa work hand-in-hand in mediating a ceasefire in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). In a globalized world, this is what partnership must resemble. The days of “ghetto-mindedness” must give way to broader dialogues. No two countries in conflict must claim that their battles are a bilateral matter and mediation is unacceptable. Multilateralism is the only way forward.
As The Daily Maverick states in its article Ramaphosa chose a resolve-and-reset mode on SA-US ties despite Trump’s white Afrikaner genocide claims. Trump’s rationality is transactional, built on a “show strength and never retreat” doctrine. Ramaphosa’s rationality is procedural, focused on long-term stability, alliance-building and respectful dialogue. Pragmatism defines what Ramaphosa went for. He opted for the many secured jobs that he might lose.
President Ramaphosa has left behind a relatively model for North- Global relations. The South Africa-USA meeting showed what happens when two conflicting political logics meet. Political stress yields opportunities for truth telling, claiming dignity, and pursuing justice. Dialogue is the way forward. But when a conflict has endured for 76 years, it is obvious that when things go wrong, the worst will surface.
Ramaphosa chose the middle route. His strategy was to take along his political opposition in his Government of National Unity. By opening the doors to international scrutiny, he allowed the globe to be the judge of the US vs SA foreign policy stance and posture. In the final analysis, Ramaphosa may have come out the winner by maintaining the high moral ground. Trump cares two hoots about moral ground.
The USA still holds the upper hand. And, it can be expected that after Ramaphosa did not act as firmly. An apology on the allegation of white genocide should have been a non-negotiable. After all, that charge was made on the basis of US self-interest, perhaps, and Israel prodding. If the US comes out on top, they are going to gradually dominate South Africa and exploit its resources, and diminish the country’s selfhood.
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Get the latest CounterCurrents updates delivered straight to your inbox.
Ranjan Solomon is a political analyst
